Ina's quick and dirty 3.5 fix

[InaVegt]

Disclaimer: This will not solve all balance issues, however, it will lessen the power of spellcasters, hopefully. Also note that this does not address any issues outside core.

Quick nerfs
For prepared casters, spells take 10 minutes/spell level to prepare. Cantrips count as half a spell level.
Clerics and druids have a d6 hit die, have poor BAB, and do not gain proficiency in any armor but leather.
Arcane casters don't get bonus spells for high ability scores.
Natural spell does not exist.
The same goes for divine power.

Quick boosts
Monks can make a flurry without iteratives as a standard action.
People with the two weapon fighting feat can attack with both weapons as a standard action.
Characters get 1d4 on all weapon damage rolls for each four points of BAB they have.
Power attack and weapon finesse are freely given to those who meet the requirements.

[Knaight]

Those are quick and dirty, and don't really resolve the fundamental issues behind the system. My advice would be to go over the spell lists, just the titles at the beginning of the magic chapter, and cut broken stuff.

[zagan]

I won't critic but with my quick calcul a 20th level wizard need 1820 min = (+30 hours) to prepare all it's spell for the day.
See the problem ?

[InaVegt]

I won't critic but with my quick calcul a 20th level wizard need 1820 min = (+30 hours) to prepare all it's spell for the day.
See the problem ?

Problem? That's a boon.

[zagan]

Problem? That's a boon.

It mean that you literrally can't prepare all your spell for the day if you want any time to adventure.
While that reduce the wizard endurance it doesn't reduce their power, the spell are still just as powerfull. They will just retire into their rope trick earlier.

Your effort are doable but I'm not sure it's the right direction to take to reduce their power.

[Esser-Z]

The issue with arcane casters isn't really the number of spells per day. Reducing that just encourages use of scrolls and such.

The biggest issue is spell availability, for wizards. She's a class that gets phenomenal cosmic power... and can complete reshuffle her abilities daily, allowing for the perfect set up for any situation. The quickest Wizard fix is, basically, Sorcerer. You still have a vast number of spells to pick from, but your choices are fixed. You don't get to play with every tool, just the ones you want.

[Stompy]

Clerics and druids have a d6 hit die, have poor BAB, and do not gain proficiency in any armor but leather.

It seems so weird for Druids to NOT have hide proficiency.

[Kobold-Bard]

Why not just us the Shapeshift Druid? Seems to sort out their issues quite nicely.

An zagan is right, the 4 hour adventuring day is because the Wizard has used up precious resources, this will just make them want to rest more often.

[Mulletmanalive]

Why not just us the Shapeshift Druid? Seems to sort out their issues quite nicely.

An zagan is right, the 4 hour adventuring day is because the Wizard has used up precious resources, this will just make them want to rest more often.

From experience, it really didn't back in 2e where that rule is from. It encouraged Wizards to save up their spells for the big hits and use a crossbow when there wasn't a need for them. The only time that resting was all that common was at low levels when they needed the hp back...

This is my experience with a reasonable GM who used lots of minor-ish encounters and timelimits due to game events.

[zagan]

From experience, it really didn't back in 2e where that rule is from. It encouraged Wizards to save up their spells for the big hits and use a crossbow when there wasn't a need for them. The only time that resting was all that common was at low levels when they needed the hp back...

This is my experience with a reasonable GM who used lots of minor-ish encounters and timelimits due to game events.

Of course it depend on the game and the DM style. But in that case the higher level you are the less appealing playing a wizard become. So nobody play it. It's stealth banning, make the class so unapelling that you don't want to play it and that's no way to balance a class.

[Mulletmanalive]

Of course it depend on the game and the DM style. But in that case the higher level you are the less appealing playing a wizard become. So nobody play it. It's stealth banning, make the class so unapelling that you don't want to play it and that's no way to balance a class.

Again, not really true. Most monsters would go down within 2 spells of your top shelf anyway; at higher levels because of the magic resistance. Wizard was THE powerhouse class; a lot of combats revolved around keeping the guy on his feet so the spell could happen and end the situation.

Your argument is only really valid when you're applying 3.5e expectations to the game. Many of us took one look at the "one hour at the beginning of the day" rule and thought "oh, this is going to get STUPID."

[Milskidasith]

Ignoring the adventuring time problems (whether the workday becomes shorter with more rest or wizards just cast less) it doesn't change a single 9th level spell can contribute more than lower tier classes.

Edit: applying 3.5 expectations to a 3.5 fix is entirely reasonable.

[Temotei]

Edit: applying 3.5 expectations to a 3.5 fix is entirely reasonable.

Expected, even.

[Mulletmanalive]

Edit: applying 3.5 expectations to a 3.5 fix is entirely reasonable.

I assumed he was making a reference to the 2e Wizard, which wasn't played because it was ridiculously hard/boring surviving until 5th level, rather than being less powerful at higher levels, where it was the daddy.

I was merely opining that the 3.5 expectation that wizards spelldump doesn't mean that being unable to do so stops them being incredibly powerful. Heck, a mere 2 hours worth of spells was capable of ending any encounter with something less powerful than a Pitfiend or the Tarrasque if played right [probably still is; Timestop, Magic Missile, Magic Missile, Magic Missile? Maybe just bury them with Wall of Force and then Wall of Stone, then Stone Shape?]

Also, isn't the point of a fix to CHANGE expectations?

[Milskidasith]

Also, isn't the point of a fix to CHANGE expectations?

Yes and no. Yes, the point is to change balance expectations; a fix should probably make whatever it is trying to do more balanced. No, it is not to change design expectations; D&D 3.5e is designed with a certain type of playstyle in mind (easy use of daily resources, massive customizability, easy and effective multiclassing, etc.). Changing the design of D&D 3.5e, even if it's in order to balance it, is not really a good thing because most people play 3.5 because it is, well, 3.5e. Making it more like 2e is not a good way to balance 3.5e.

[Mulletmanalive]

That would be the difference there, i suppose; Wizards were different back then because they had adventure limited resources and the ability to recharge a few on the move. Everyone else with limited use abilities [rare but not unheard of] got them back daily, bringing them more into line with the sheer power of the Wizard.

The challenge here is either making it pointless to nova with a spellcaster or making it preferable not to but as those are apparently ore assumptions of 3.5 [based on what you've just said], i have no idea what might actually improve the game.

[Milskidasith]

That would be the difference there, i suppose; Wizards were different back then because they had adventure limited resources and the ability to recharge a few on the move. Everyone else with limited use abilities [rare but not unheard of] got them back daily, bringing them more into line with the sheer power of the Wizard.

The challenge here is either making it pointless to nova with a spellcaster or making it preferable not to but as those are apparently ore assumptions of 3.5 [based on what you've just said], i have no idea what might actually improve the game.

Balancing the spells so that you got a decent bit of utility, but level 7/8 spells are about the equivalent of ninth level manuevers, would probably do the job. (A bit lower level for spells because that's all casters have, while ToB stuff has boosts and a much better chassis). Making casters take forever to prepare spells just means sorcs would be played more or DMs would handwave it or more wizards would have demiplanes just to prep spells in a reasonable amount of time.

The problem is, balancing the spells is a huge job that nobody has actually done, AFAIK.

[Mulletmanalive]

Arguskos has been threatening to post his notes on the subject for ages.

I just scrapped the spell-list entirely and started with some tables and base assumptions. Also, I scrapped any and all variables based on caster level, which brought the low level stuff more into relevance...

Took me a moment, but i get your comment on the 7/8 level spells equalling 9th level manoeuvres. Manoeuvres can be used over and over.