PDA

View Full Version : Most balanced base classes in all of 3.5 (not just core)?



Frosty
2008-02-15, 06:32 PM
We always get lots of complaints about classes either being underpowered or overpowered, and I think everyone is by now familiar with the CW Samurai, Truenamer, Monk, Omnificer, CoDzilla, Batman, etc. But what about the classes that are balanced? Those that all other classes should learn from in terms of design standpoint because they're useful, yet still have their blind spots and weaknesses, and there is a reason to take all 20 levels in that class. In your opinion, what are the 3 most balanced base classes in DnD 3.5?

Mine are:

1) Warblade
2) Duskblade
3) Beguiler

I would've mentioned Rogue, except there is absolutely no reason to take Rogue level 20. They have the worse Capstone ability evah.

Solo
2008-02-15, 06:34 PM
Rogue, Warlock, Dragonfire Adept, Barbarian, and Bard.

_Puppetmaster_
2008-02-15, 06:35 PM
mine are:

1: Binder
2: Spellthief
3: Scout

Overlard
2008-02-15, 06:41 PM
1) Rogue
2) Duskblade
3) Beguiler

Kurald Galain
2008-02-15, 06:46 PM
Rogue, Warlock, Dragonfire Adept, Barbarian, and Bard.

Sounds reasonable. How about Ranger, too?

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-15, 06:48 PM
Add psychic warrior to the mix. And the soulborn.

Fax Celestis
2008-02-15, 06:51 PM
Totemist, Spellthief, Ardent.

Frosty
2008-02-15, 06:54 PM
I said 3, not 5 :smallyuk:

And go ahead and put your reasoning for 1 or even all 3 of your picks. I liked Warblade because they're warriors who never run out of interesting things to do. They don't have wizard-level power, but they can do more than just "I hit it" "I charge it" "I trip it" or "I fire an arrow at it"

Fax Celestis
2008-02-15, 06:59 PM
Totemist has versatility within limits, sort of what wild shape was supposed to be like. Spellthief can be powerful but relies on taking that power from others first, which puts them in a very precarious position before they actually do any thievery. Ardent puts limits on the powers one has available but still allows for one to have both variety and versatility.

Draz74
2008-02-15, 07:28 PM
Here's another vote for Binder, Psychic Warrior, and Knight.

(Edited)

Chronos
2008-02-15, 07:39 PM
I honestly can't agree at all with Spellthief or Beguiler being balanced, since they both basically make the Rogue redundant. The rogue is already balanced; taking a rogue and giving it magical abilities in addition breaks it.

Another candidate for balance might be the Warlock. Sure, it's not as powerful as the true casters, but that's not a bad thing. And the unlimited-use magic gives it its own niche to fill. The UMD scroll thing might be a bit much, though.

And Barbarian might not be quite the most optimized melee class, but it has the enormous advantage that it's pretty decent, right off the shelf. The game needs a class like the barbarian, that you can just hand to a complete newbie, and he won't really be able to screw it up. You can give a fighter the wrong feats, and you can give a Warblade the wrong maneuvers, but with a barbarian, as long as you pick up Power Attack, you're good.

KIDS
2008-02-15, 07:51 PM
Favored Soul, Factotum, Spirit Shaman, Psion, Artificer, Crusader, Swordsage, Warblade, Dusbkblade, Beguiler, Sorcerer

This is from a power point of view; it does not take into account poor game design, blandness, lack of choices or etc.

Hm, ok, most 3:

1. Psion
2. Crusader
3. Beguiler

Jack_Simth
2008-02-15, 08:03 PM
We always get lots of complaints about classes either being underpowered or overpowered, and I think everyone is by now familiar with the CW Samurai, Truenamer, Monk, Omnificer, CoDzilla, Batman, etc. But what about the classes that are balanced? Those that all other classes should learn from in terms of design standpoint because they're useful, yet still have their blind spots and weaknesses, and there is a reason to take all 20 levels in that class. In your opinion, what are the 3 most balanced base classes in DnD 3.5?

Balance is in relation to the other classes. There is no "most balanced" class for the simple reason that if all classes target the exact same power level (and hit the target) they will all be balanced, regardless of where that target is placed.

The most balanced three classes, therefore, are any set of X, Y, and Z, where the relative power of X = the relative power of Y = the relative power of Z.

Bauglir
2008-02-15, 08:12 PM
Right. So which of the classes in 3.5 is most balanced compared to other classes and the sorts of encounters one would be facing at that level? No reason to shoot down the question unnecessarily. Especially when your logical flaw is nonexistent, what with all classes being NOT balanced with one another.

Also, on topic, I'd say Psychic Warrior, Warlock, and Rogue. Psychic Warrior gives you ever-important options in battle through manifesting and feats, but you still pay with your lower Base Attack Bonus and Hit Die for a melee class, forcing you to use some of those options to cover up your weaknesses, but at the same time leaving you a very effective combatant. Warlocks get all the magic fluff of Sorcerers, only moreso, and also have a nice mechanic to go along with them; useful effects usable at will without breaking the game. Rogues get to fill the role of skill-monkey, but they have a role in combat, which means they don't feel useless half or more of the time. And it's a tactical role, too, which also allows for something more interesting to do than just charge and full attack.

Saph
2008-02-15, 08:29 PM
My picks for 'most balanced':

• Ranger
• Duskblade
• Psychic Warrior

All can contribute at every level, to some degree, but never become either useless or godly. (It's not a coincidence that they're all half- or three-quarter casters.) Rogue is iffy because so many creatures are immune to sneak attacks.

There is no WAY Crusaders or Beguilers make the list. Crusaders are outrageously powerful tanks, virtually unkillable in a toe-to-toe, and Beguilers are primary spellcasters who count among their spells known some of the most powerful spells in the game (colour spray, haste, greater mirror image, dominate monster, time stop).

- Saph

Everyman
2008-02-15, 08:48 PM
Hmmm...granted, I don't have every supplement ever printed, but I'd list the top three as follows (in no paticular order):

1) Ranger
2) Spirit Shaman
3) Duskblade

Rangers seem to have a balance between skills and fighting ability. A ranger's lower HD makes him a bit more fragile than, say, a fighter or barbarian. However, their favored enemy bonuses, good saves, skill points, a modest supply of minor magics help make them very versatile warriors.

Spirit shamans are precisely how I wish all casters were built. Two (2) necessary ability scores (Charisma and Wisdom), a spont. caster who can switch out spells known each day, and with class abilities that are unique and useful.

Finally, the duskblade...the only gish class that seems to work. Excellent battle skills, but balanced out by a moderate HD (see ranger). Enough magic for it to make a difference, but not enough to overshadow a full caster. They are able to fill a variety of roles, but their spont. casting means that one doesn't have to worry about them quickening spells and striking with a sword all in the same round.

Frosty
2008-02-15, 08:49 PM
Since when do Beguilers know Otto's Irresistable Dance? And yes, they've got a decent spell list. They also only target Will saves. Unlike Batman, there is a *lot* of things a Beguiler can't do. I also wouldn't call Haste one of the best spells. It's good, but hardly game breaking.

Nebo_
2008-02-15, 08:49 PM
Favored Soul, Factotum, Spirit Shaman, Psion, Artificer, Crusader, Swordsage, Warblade, Dusbkblade, Beguiler, Sorcerer


Almost everyone of those is considered to be one of the most powerful classes in the game. How do you justify an artificer being balanced?

My list has the Psychic Warrior, Barbarian and Rogue.

Frosty
2008-02-15, 08:51 PM
Later on I will try to compile a running tally of how many votes for each class. Thoe of you who picked more than 3 classes, edit your posts down to 3 or I'll just randomly take 3 from the list or discount the votes for now.

Cuddly
2008-02-15, 08:53 PM
I don't think ranger is that great, since it's key class features are largely bad. TWF is weak, favored enemy is too conditional, and the animal companion is a patsy.

tyckspoon
2008-02-15, 08:56 PM
Finally, the duskblade...the only gish class that seems to work. Excellent battle skills, but balanced out by a moderate HD (see ranger). Enough magic for it to make a difference, but not enough to overshadow a full caster. They are able to fill a variety of roles, but their spont. casting means that one doesn't have to worry about them quickening spells and striking with a sword all in the same round.

:smallconfused:

That's exactly what Duskblades do! It's the point of the class in combat! It's not broken thanks to the tight focus of the Duskblade spell list, but really.

Saph
2008-02-15, 09:00 PM
Since when do Beguilers know Otto's Irresistable Dance? And yes, they've got a decent spell list. They also only target Will saves. Unlike Batman, there is a *lot* of things a Beguiler can't do. I also wouldn't call Haste one of the best spells. It's good, but hardly game breaking.

Whoops, didn't mean to put irresistable dance in there. Corrected.

Anyway . . . I'll happily take a beguiler over almost any other class in D&D. They have more than a 'decent' spell list, they have an awesome spell list. A Beguiler will easily outperform a Sorcerer at low levels, and can match them at mid levels. If you're going to say Beguilers are balanced, then 75% of the classes in the game are going to be underpowered by comparison.

- Saph

Solo
2008-02-15, 09:01 PM
I said 3, not 5 :smallyuk:


"And five is right out."

Sornas
2008-02-15, 09:01 PM
My personal picks ^_^ Just my opinion, really.
1. Spellthieves
2. Warlocks
3. Bards

Belial_the_Leveler
2008-02-15, 10:22 PM
1) Warlock
2) Spirit Shaman
3) Hexblade


Warlock is a decent damage-dealer if you consider him a warrior, not a caster and has some pretty cool but not overpowered abilities. He's pretty weak offencively but makes up with some control and defence.
Spirit Shaman has limited spells known out of the more balanced full caster spell list in the game (druid) without the overpowering shapeshifting powers of druids.
Hexblade is a warrior that doesn't get owned by save-or-die, save-or-suck and has some tricks up his sleeves. He's also weak offencively though.

KoDT69
2008-02-15, 10:28 PM
1 - Bard
2 - Warlock
3 - Rogue

Crow
2008-02-15, 10:32 PM
Since everybody's view of what is balanced or not will vary, I'm just going to put in three classes that have never broken my game, but at the same time were never useless. (We only use core, plus the players can use a few selected books...but the DM only uses core)

1. Rogue
2. Barbarian
3. Warlock

I'm going to have to throw in a negative vote for Warblade (or any of the ToB classes). They were designed to close the gap between martial characters and the most powerful classes in the game (full casters). They don't tend to play well with other martial classes from outside that book. The barbarian, a relatively balanced martial character, pales in comparison to ToB classes.

I AM NOT SAYING WARBLADES ARE OVERPOWERED...before you guys jump on that. Just that I wouldn't put them up as "most balanced".

Squash Monster
2008-02-15, 11:05 PM
The idea of "most balanced" in this context doesn't mean a thing. Balance is in relation to other classes. Jack Simth explained it better than I will.

So instead, here's a list of 8 largely internally balanced classes I made for something else (you can skip the last two if you don't like modified classes):
1) Fighter (with good feat selection)
2) Crusader
3) Swordsage
4) Rogue
5) Warlock
6) Bard
7) Favored Soul (plus two domains, spell level progression slowed down to bard speed)
8) Druid (shapeshift variant, spell level progression slowed down to bard speed)

TheOOB
2008-02-15, 11:36 PM
"balanced" is a difficult question. We all know batman and CoDzilla is unbalanced for being way too powerful, and we know rogues and fighters are way to weak when compared to anyone else. And of course, simply by saying that I have half the board disagreeing with me.

Anyways, I've never been one to keep my 2c to myself so here is my list of best "designed" base classes. My criteria are a) they must have a clear party role, b) they must be viable from level 1 to 20 c) they must multiclass well, both as a major class (half to a majority of your levels) and a dip d) they must gain benefit from a PrC but still stand to lose something of importance, and e) they be able to be a good member in a 4 person party without overshadowing their other members.

The classes I find that best fit this criteria are(in no particular order) warblade, swordsage, crusader, duskblade, and beguiler. Note that they are all some of the more recentally created DnD classes, that gives me some hope for 4e :).

Emperor Tippy
2008-02-15, 11:37 PM
Whoops, didn't mean to put irresistable dance in there. Corrected.

Anyway . . . I'll happily take a beguiler over almost any other class in D&D. They have more than a 'decent' spell list, they have an awesome spell list. A Beguiler will easily outperform a Sorcerer at low levels, and can match them at mid levels. If you're going to say Beguilers are balanced, then 75% of the classes in the game are going to be underpowered by comparison.

- Saph

I would say closer to 80% are underpowered. About 10% are overpowered. The other 10% are pretty balanced.

The only really "balanced" (as in at the right power level for the monsters and not dependent on party configuration to keep it worthwhile) classe in core is the Bard and possibly the Ranger. The Cleric and Wizard are broken. The rest are either far from being versatile enough or just flat out to weak for the monsters/challenges the face unless you go far out of your way to make them useful. Balance is based on average builds, not what you can do with every splatbook and a good powergamer. Yes you can make a playable fighter but the average fighter is far too weak.

Outside of core the Psychic Warrior is pretty balanced. The Psion is right on the cusp of being overpowered.

The Warlock is balanced. ToB is balanced, at the high end of balanced but balanced none the less.

Fawsto
2008-02-16, 12:47 AM
If there was not a misunderstood code and something after level 6, I'd say the Paladin. They are nice to play. Smooth.

Well, 3 favs?

1. Crusader
2. Warblade
3. Barbarian

Tehy all don't need anything else to be nice.

Everyman
2008-02-16, 01:29 AM
:smallconfused:

That's exactly what Duskblades do! It's the point of the class in combat! It's not broken thanks to the tight focus of the Duskblade spell list, but really.

My apologies. What I meant was that Duskblades can not spend every turn casting powerful magic and engaging in melee combat. I should have emphasized that they are not warping reality on the level of a wizard and fighting with the skill of a fighter at the same time. Instead, they are seeking the middle ground.

Draz74
2008-02-16, 01:38 AM
To consolidate the opinions on this thread so far, the following classes have been voted for by multiple people without anyone really objecting to their inclusion:


Barbarian
Bard
Binder
Duskblade
Psychic Warrior
Spirit Shaman
Warlock


Dragonfire Adept and Knight have been mentioned only once each, but seem to fit in very well with the above list.

Multiple people feel that Rogue and Ranger fit into this list too, but some say they are slightly too weak. Multiple people feel that Tome of Battle classes fit into this list well, while a few dissenters say they are slightly too powerful.

Orzel
2008-02-16, 05:03 AM
Balance is hard to describe on its own so I'll give multiple list.

balanced- has a very good amount of combat and noncombat power without hogging the spotlight at some important job
Ranger Warlock Spellthief

balanced- average build power from new to experienced players (strong classes with little customization to screw them up, little use of splatbooks, and some self control on cheese)
Rogue Cleric PsyWarrior

balanced-average build power with experienced players and some resources
Barbarian Spirit Shaman Swordsage

Emperor Tippy
2008-02-16, 06:03 AM
Balance is hard to describe on its own so I'll give multiple list.

balanced- has a very good amount of combat and noncombat power without hogging the spotlight at some important job
Ranger Warlock Spellthief

balanced- average build power from new to experienced players (strong classes with little customization to screw them up, little use of splatbooks, and some self control on cheese)
Rogue Cleric PsyWarrior

balanced-average build power with experienced players and some resources
Barbarian Spirit Shaman Swordsage

You just lost all credibility when you said the cleric was balanced. Even out of the box in core (the single most broken book in 3.5 by far) they are broken. Too versatile, too many roles they can fill at the same time, too strong.

CockroachTeaParty
2008-02-16, 06:14 AM
Geh... Tough call.

1. Duskblade
I agree with several others, that the duskblade can contribute at just about any level, it doesn't quite step on the toes of other classes, and is just fun to play. A fine class to take, all the way to 20.

2. Swordsage
It's hard to say what niche the swordsage fills in an average party... It has some fun, flashy abilities, but it risks itself with its paltry BAB and HD. The fact that most of its abilities require the risk of melee makes it a fun, pseudo-caster class, and of the ToB classes, I think it might be the most balanced. Another great class to take for all 20 levels.

3. Shadowcaster
I admit I haven't played enough with the shadowcaster to really stand behind this decision, but with what little experience I've had playing them they seem somehow well designed. Sure, they're not as powerful as casters. But they are flavorful, and the slow progression of their powers transforming from spells to supernatural abilities makes even their basic mysteries useful. I think it's a well designed class, though many think it needs tweaking.

Yami
2008-02-16, 08:00 AM
Adept/Warrior/Expert.

Look at them and despair, for they are balance.
Search your heart, you know it to be true.

Draz74
2008-02-16, 11:53 AM
Adept/Warrior/Expert.

Look at them and despair, for they are balance.
Search your heart, you know it to be true.

Nah. Adept beats the stuffing out of Warrior and Expert easily. So if Warrior and Expert are defined as a model of balance, Adept is clearly a broken class.

On a related note, Kobold Adept 4 was voted the toughest possible CR 1 encounter in the game in another thread.

Frosty
2008-02-16, 12:16 PM
I've already defined what "balanced" means in the context of this thread back in my opening post.


they're useful, yet still have their blind spots and weaknesses, and there is a reason to take all 20 levels in that class.

If a class does not meet all three criteria, then it's probably not all that balanced.

Saph: You're right. 75% of the classes underperform compared to the Beguilers. That's because 75% of them are either grossly or slightly underpowered and not balanced. The Beguiler power level, what ohe can do, and the kind of weaknesses he has is exactly where DnD classes should be: Someone who is good at what they do, yet clearly has areas where he can't contribute much.

Frosty
2008-02-16, 12:18 PM
To consolidate the opinions on this thread so far, the following classes have been voted for by multiple people without anyone really objecting to their inclusion:


Barbarian
Bard
Binder
Duskblade
Psychic Warrior
Spirit Shaman
Warlock


Dragonfire Adept and Knight have been mentioned only once each, but seem to fit in very well with the above list.

Multiple people feel that Rogue and Ranger fit into this list too, but some say they are slightly too weak. Multiple people feel that Tome of Battle classes fit into this list well, while a few dissenters say they are slightly too powerful.

Beguiler has been nominated no less than 5 times as well, but there has been some objections to it obviously.

KIDS
2008-02-16, 12:19 PM
Oh sorry about the Artificer, that one was a typo :)

Deepblue706
2008-02-16, 12:31 PM
Wizard, Cleric, Druid.

...

What? :smallconfused:

Chronos
2008-02-16, 12:39 PM
Quoth Emperor Tippy:
The only really "balanced" (as in at the right power level for the monsters and not dependent on party configuration to keep it worthwhile) classe in core is the Bard and possibly the Ranger. The Cleric and Wizard are broken. The rest are either far from being versatile enough or just flat out to weak for the monsters/challenges the face unless you go far out of your way to make them useful.It sounds like you just said that druids are underpowered... Was that an oversight? I mean, even without dino-cheese, a dire bear druid (a fairly obvious core form) is more powerful than most warrior classes, and they're still full casters.

I would also say that the only sense in which sorcerers are underpowered is by comparison with wizards. While that's an obvious comparison, given how similar they are, they're still overpowered compared to the Bard or Ranger, which you're calling about right.

Kioran
2008-02-16, 12:55 PM
Tough one. A class should, of course, be good at one thing and quite possibly capable of doing another if their primary occupation is "unavailable". It should also be capable of working within a team - thatīs the reason I donīt like Psionics - the "Egoist" is the only non-egoistic Psion.......Full casting is broken anyway.
Also, some classes which have, previously, been balanced to a certain degree were broken retroactively, through supplements - think Sublime Chord.

So if itīs about the balance a moderately experienced player can achieve with the majority of splatbooks, I would place my bets for:

Ranger - A relatively good secondary combatant, also has two good saves and Evasion, which makes him moderately resilent against most threats, while Favored enemy and either a good Feat selection make him capable of dealing okay-ish damage. Can contribute out of combat as well, has some minor spells, and in a pinch can use the wand of CLW to help his buddies. Nice. --> Secondary combatant/secondary skillmonkey

Rogue - Customizable. Either a SADD (Sneak attack delivery-device, something less than a character but a little more than a stat-block), or the groupīs resident skillmonkey and secondary combatant. Can deal good damage against many foes, but has to tread lightly. Is built for teamwork. The only downside, Iīd say, is that a Rogue requires a savvy player.
--> Secondary combatant/Primary Skillmonkey

Hexblade - Somewhat resilent, albeit not against physical damage, thanks to their good will save, Mettle, and limited Spellcasting, they make a good backup for secondary Fighter and some control. Theyīre good that way. Sadly, they have close to zero capability out of combat, but otherwise they work fine, with several options in a fight as well.
--> Secondary combatant/Secondary magic offense

Iīd place a honorable mention for the Bard - I hate the archetype, but in core they were actually quite balanced, and a nice class to play that never got boring without hogging the spotlight.

The PHB2 classes, allthough every single one is quite interesting, are a bit overpowered imho, especially the Beguiler. The one positive thing to say about them, however, is that they work from 1 to 20, every single one. But still, a full casting class with Trapfinding and Int-based spontaneous casting is more powerful than the Rogue, because it can wear two hats, and do it well - no secondary skillmonkey/secondary magic offense there.

Reinboom
2008-02-16, 12:56 PM
Quoth Emperor Tippy:It sounds like you just said that druids are underpowered... Was that an oversight? I mean, even without dino-cheese, a dire bear druid (a fairly obvious core form) is more powerful than most warrior classes, and they're still full casters.

I would also say that the only sense in which sorcerers are underpowered is by comparison with wizards. While that's an obvious comparison, given how similar they are, they're still overpowered compared to the Bard or Ranger, which you're calling about right.
I consider sorcerers two ways.
They are overpowered in their capability to apply their spellcasting
They are underpowered in their flexibility overall.

I would say that upping their spells known, but slowing down their spell progression would help.
Sort of.
Like... this (http://pifro.com/dnd/NEW/?F=NOcustom&B=BBBG20&H=132&C=sorcerer.customB.sorcerer&S=66&V=25472)
but... slower. And with certain spells banned still.

Anyways, I will have to say:
1. Warblade.
2. The How it should be paladin. Sort of. I still have minor issues. (with a significant portion of it attributed to .. I just hate alignments)
3. Favored Soul. Pre 14th.
Alt 3. Dragon Shaman modified to have partial sorcerer spellcasting works very well.
Another Alt 3. A good modified sorcerer with a fair player. Of course, that's not so much a class thing since it can still be abused if tried.

sikyon
2008-02-16, 12:58 PM
Balance is in relation to the other classes. There is no "most balanced" class for the simple reason that if all classes target the exact same power level (and hit the target) they will all be balanced, regardless of where that target is placed.

The most balanced three classes, therefore, are any set of X, Y, and Z, where the relative power of X = the relative power of Y = the relative power of Z.

You forgot that you can benchmark them against the average CR difficulty, so there is an absolute scale.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-16, 01:21 PM
BTW, something to add: A rogue is only balanced if you give him Penetrating Strike. Without it, he goes into "Useless uncheesed" territory, because everyone and their momma is immune to sneak attacks at high levels.

sikyon
2008-02-16, 01:37 PM
BTW, something to add: A rogue is only balanced if you give him Penetrating Strike. Without it, he goes into "Useless uncheesed" territory, because everyone and their momma is immune to sneak attacks at high levels.

Technically rouge is very powerful thanks to his ranks in UMD.

Jerthanis
2008-02-16, 02:32 PM
For me it's:

1.) Ranger
2.) Warlock
3.) Psychic Warrior

I'd also put in that Beguilers are poorly balanced more than they are Overpowered. They have a sweet spot of about level 4 to level 10 or 12, and in that period they pretty much outstrip Sorcerers and Wizards in terms of pretty much everything. From spells known to class features to party buffs to area control... Beguilers get it all, better, faster and with more attribute synergy than Wizards or Sorcerers. Then they slow down viciously after 10 or 12, when they stop getting good spells that aren't will-negates and so much is mindblanked or immune to mind affects, and when Haste is no longer a fight-ending buff. However, they are still consistently better than out of the box Sorcerers until the very end. Sorcerers have to abuse Polymorph and hunt broken spells out of the Spell Compendium to regain their dominance. And Sorcerers are normally considered only one or two steps down from Wizards, and pretty much still rule the school in core-only.

Chronos
2008-02-16, 03:02 PM
BTW, something to add: A rogue is only balanced if you give him Penetrating Strike. Without it, he goes into "Useless uncheesed" territory, because everyone and their momma is immune to sneak attacks at high levels.This is like saying that wizards are only balanced if they have Energy Substitution, because a lot of things are immune to Fireball. The successful wizard doesn't care that things are immune to Fireball, since he's using save-or-suck or battlefield control spells instead to win fights. And the successful rogue doesn't care that things are immune to Sneak Attack, since he's using skills instead to avoid fights entirely.

Emperor Tippy
2008-02-16, 06:41 PM
Quoth Emperor Tippy:It sounds like you just said that druids are underpowered... Was that an oversight? I mean, even without dino-cheese, a dire bear druid (a fairly obvious core form) is more powerful than most warrior classes, and they're still full casters.

I would also say that the only sense in which sorcerers are underpowered is by comparison with wizards. While that's an obvious comparison, given how similar they are, they're still overpowered compared to the Bard or Ranger, which you're calling about right.

Yeah, Druids were an oversight.

As for Sorcerers. They are too weak, by virtue of limited versatility, to compete with the Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Artificer, Archivist, etc. so they don't really have a place as anything except a fifth wheel in a party/game made to be highpowered (if everyone is one of the traditionally "broken" classes it works out pretty well) but at the same time as a full caster who uses the Wizard spell list they are far to powerful for a regular game unless they go pretty much entirely blaster. And in that case you may as well go Psion.

So Sorcerers really don't fit in any level.

As I said, I am defining balance as the following:
-Capable of keeping oneself alive.
-Capable of posing a credible threat to 90%+ of the published monsters of an equal or lesser CR.
-Versatile enough to have out of combat uses.
-Not capable of filling more than 1 roll excellently or 3 roles adequately.

To look at both extremes lets compare the fighter and the wizard.

1. Capable of keeping oneself alive.
Wizard: Yes, if played half way competently.
Fighter: No, unless played exceptionally well.

2. Capable of posing a credible threat to 90%+ of the published monsters of an equal or lesser CR.
Wizard: Yes, easily.
Fighter: No.

3. Versatile enough to have out of combat uses.
Wizard: Yes. Lots of out of combat spells and utility spells. Plus with Int as the main stat has ok skills.
Fighter: No useful out of combat class abilities, to few skill points to be useful.

4. Not capable of filling more than 1 role excellently or 3 roles adequately.
Wizard: This is where the wizard gets broken. Can fill most roles excellently with no real weak roles.
Fighter: Can't even fill 1 role adequately without exceptional splat book use by an experienced player.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-16, 07:01 PM
This is like saying that wizards are only balanced if they have Energy Substitution, because a lot of things are immune to Fireball. The successful wizard doesn't care that things are immune to Fireball, since he's using save-or-suck or battlefield control spells instead to win fights. And the successful rogue doesn't care that things are immune to Sneak Attack, since he's using skills instead to avoid fights entirely.

If wiht skills you mean UMD, which falls right into the "useless uncheesed" terriotory. Most DM's aren't merciful enough to provide you with XP because you sneaked past dem orks.

Chronos
2008-02-16, 07:16 PM
If wiht skills you mean UMD, which falls right into the "useless uncheesed" terriotory. Most DM's aren't merciful enough to provide you with XP because you sneaked past dem orks.Then the problem is the houserule that ignores that XP is awarded for defeating challenges, not killing them. But the rules do say that sneaking past monsters is worth XP.

Azerian Kelimon
2008-02-16, 07:25 PM
Sadly, that rule is rule 0'ed out of existance by most DM's unintentionally.

Orzel
2008-02-16, 07:55 PM
You just lost all credibility when you said the cleric was balanced. Even out of the box in core (the single most broken book in 3.5 by far) they are broken. Too versatile, too many roles they can fill at the same time, too strong.


Cleric if not focused in Zilla cheese are pretty balanced. If you don't go out of your way to triple buff yourself and grab feats and spells form splats, they are pretty balanced. It's just the amount of self control needed is unbalanced. Unlike a wizard who either sucks or wins, an average cleric who doesn't walk around with 4 DF, 4 DP, and 4RMs is okay. The problem is you have little reason not to it you have the resources. Clerics are balanced if your definition is average noncheese build. Every other definition... not so much. It's not like a druid which requires you to ignore common sense to be balanced.

The Extinguisher
2008-02-16, 08:00 PM
I'd also like to cast my first two votes for Binder and Bard.

As my third, I'm going to go out on a limb and say Paladin. Okay, put down the pitchforks and hear me out. While they are exactly powerhouses, they get the job done. As long as you play them well, and work out all that code buisness, they work fine.

Emperor Tippy
2008-02-16, 08:44 PM
Cleric if not focused in Zilla cheese are pretty balanced. If you don't go out of your way to triple buff yourself and grab feats and spells form splats, they are pretty balanced. It's just the amount of self control needed is unbalanced. Unlike a wizard who either sucks or wins, an average cleric who doesn't walk around with 4 DF, 4 DP, and 4RMs is okay. The problem is you have little reason not to it you have the resources. Clerics are balanced if your definition is average noncheese build. Every other definition... not so much. It's not like a druid which requires you to ignore common sense to be balanced.

No. The average cleric build is cheese.

DF, DP, and RM are in the average cleric build (and if they aren't your a fool). The only time they are excluded is when a player is deliberately weakening themselves so as not to unbalance the game.

And those are just 1 example.

The cleric fills the healer role. But he is also an offensive powerhouse. And an excellent party buffer. And even without all 3 of DF,DP, and RM an ok melee type.

You can play a balanced cleric, just like you can play a balanced wizard. But the average cleric build made by the average D&D player without splat books will be significantly more powerful than most everything else. And with splat books it gets even more unbalanced.

And you can't even consider the zilla aspect an unintentional oversight. WotC deliberately upped the power level of th cleric because they believed that no player wanted to be a heal bot. So they gave them all the healer abilities plus spells and abilities that made them credible in combat roles. DP, DF, and RM were not accidents. They do exactly what WotC intended them to do.

Chronos
2008-02-16, 11:24 PM
No. The average cleric build is cheese.

DF, DP, and RM are in the average cleric build (and if they aren't your a fool). The only time they are excluded is when a player is deliberately weakening themselves so as not to unbalance the game.It's not necessarily deliberate. There are still players out there who genuinely believe that any spell slot a cleric uses for anything other than a healing spell is a wasted spell slot. Those players are wrong, of course, and you know that, and I know that, but they don't. They're not deliberately weakening the cleric; it's just happening as a side effect.

Of course, even in that case, the cleric still isn't balanced, since a pure healbot is inferior to a fighter. The real problem is that anyone who knows enough to make a cleric not suck, also knows enough to make everything else suck by comparison.

Diamondeye
2008-02-17, 08:02 AM
I'll put in votes for:

1. Barbarian
2. Swordsage
3. Warblade

Ranger Ive got to comment on. In my opinion, it's more balanced if you take the archery path; Rapid Shot is handy at any level, and you can get Improved Rapid Shot later on to cancel the penalty if you really feel you need it. You've then got the option of using your feats to either go TWF, 2 hander, or the oft-ignored weapon+shield route. I'm a big believer in 2 hander, or, if I'm a human and have the extra feat to burn, getting a large shield and bastard sword. A mithril large shield is a bargain at 1000 gp and deals quite nicely with the skill penalties. With either path you can then pick up the other archery feats.

IMO, Rangers should have retained 10-sided hit dice and medium armor proficiency from 3.0. "OOPS I put on hide armor now I forgot how to rapid shot" uh... ok. Two-weapon fighting overall should be less feat-intensive; I customarily houserule that two-weapon defense is incorporated into two-weapon fighting; same for the improved and greater of each.

Emperor Demonking
2008-02-17, 08:05 AM
1) Rogue
2) Bard
3) Warlock

Frosty
2008-02-17, 02:11 PM
I'd also like to cast my first two votes for Binder and Bard.

As my third, I'm going to go out on a limb and say Paladin. Okay, put down the pitchforks and hear me out. While they are exactly powerhouses, they get the job done. As long as you play them well, and work out all that code buisness, they work fine.

Well yes except working out all that code business is...difficult.

Hzurr
2008-02-17, 06:34 PM
1. Barbarian
2. Rogue
3. Warlock

They all do exactly what they're supposed to do, and they do it well. They stay fairly powerful through all 20 levels (excluding rogue 20), and while they're all flexible, you won't step on everyone else's toes.

Ecalsneerg
2008-02-17, 07:09 PM
1.) Ranger
2.) Rogue
3.) Psychic Warrior

Frosty
2008-02-17, 11:22 PM
So far the Ranger, Rogue, and Warlock have agotten a lot of mentions. Keep it up! Next I will be asking for what would think would be make a balanced iconic party of 4. Maybe substitute Favored Soul for Cleric, and Shugenja for Wizard?

Skjaldbakka
2008-02-17, 11:23 PM
My top 3 classes in terms of striking an ideal balance?

1) Bard
2) Ranger
3) Rogue

Kompera
2008-02-17, 11:25 PM
1 - Barbarian
2 - Warlock

3 - It's a tough call. Rogue appears to be disqualified by the selection criteria, since their 20th level is not terribly useful and I'd guess that most Rogues at 20th look like Rogue 19 / Whatever 1.

So, I'll chose Bard. Cheesable, but really there are so many options that any class, even a 20th Fighter, can look like cheese next to a non-optimized character. Exclude only Diplomacy and Bards are a fun and contributing class.