A new(?) idea for balancing the classes in low-magic games

[AbeTheGnome]

A lot of the complaints I hear about low-magic games is centered around the perception that the full caster classes outshine the others when magic items are less common, especially at higher levels. I'm about to start a game using a variant that will hopefully alleviate this issue and add a lot of flavor to the game. It's very simple, and goes like this:

All PCs start with five levels in an NPC class (commoner, aristocrat, etc.) and one in a PC class (fighter, wizard, etc.). I will probably bar the adept class. This will start all PCs out with three feats (four for humans), a bunch of skill points, save bonuses, and perhaps a good amount of BAB, but no spells.

I suspect that mages will only be catching up to fighters at higher levels, as far as dealing damage goes. Magic in my campaign is only for the elite anyway, and it makes sense that the high-level spells are out of reach to all but the most extraordinary folk. I have no problems taking a campaign beyond 20th level so that those high-level spells can be accessed, but I won't be using the ELH. Almost everyone takes PrCs now anyway, so going beyond level 20 in base classes and PrCs is never a problem.

I'll be using character backgrounds from UA as a starting point on what skills and feats to grant characters for their first five levels. The first PC level, of course, will be entirely up to the players. The logic behind this is that people don't start out as heroes. They're just average people (or not so average people, as the case may be) who, for one reason or another, take up the adventurer's path and begin to pick up the extraordinary abilities that that lifestyle requires.

 

[StGabe]

In a campaign that I just started we use only Sorcerers and a variant cleric based on the Shugenja from Complete Divine. So far so good (but only to level 3 so that's not saying much). It just slows down overall spell level progression so that the really awe-inspiring spells don't get cast until a little later on. Also, Shugenja are less caster/warriors and more dedicated casters and so there is no cleric competing to be a better tank/fighter than the fighter classes.

Your system seems like it would be interesting. I think the biggest problem will be finding creatures for your characters to fight. They're going to be a match for encounters slightly below their CR but you probably don't want to start them on CR4+ stuff as they aren't heroes yet. If you have them fighting the typical lower level stuff it will be way too easy. It's actually a pretty good idea but I also think that it may shoehorn players a with a bit of baggage that isn't very interesting to them.

I think you may be better off just slowing down spell progression a bit, perhaps with a small boost to skill points and hps. If you are in a truly low-magic world, i.e. not many magic items, not a lot of casters in general, then a slow progression of spells will still be very powerful. IMC, my they are still waiting for 2nd level spells but they also each have at most 1 magic item apiece, no potions, scrolls, etc., and so the 1st levels spells are proving to be pretty important.

 

[Remathilis]

Replace shugenja with Mystic (Dragonlance, like cleric with no heavy armor or turning, only one domain, spells like sorcerer + 1 extra domain spell known) and I think you have a pretty good idea going.

Or, you could always go with the generics: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm

 

[StGabe]

In my case I'm actually using a homebrew priest. It just has the same basic stats as a Shugenja (sorceror-like spells, 1d6 hit die, 4x skills, start with simple weapons and light armor). There are 8 priest variants each with their own spell list. They have 3 "domain" spells per spell level and of which they get to pick 2 to have automatically. Otherwise they get spells as a socreror. They don't have turning but they get class abilities on every odd-based level (example: priest of house blood gets to bonuses to healing spells, wound closure, ability to scribe scrolls onto their skin, etc.).

So probably I'm already pretty close to the Mystic or at least as close to that as I am to the Shugenja.

 

[Nifft]

Forcing spellcasters to multi-class isn't exactly new, but starting everyone off with 5 levels of Aristocrat (the only NPC class that isn't totally bad) is kinda harsh for those whose concept doesn't mesh.

Cheers, -- N

 

[starwed]

I know I've said this in several other posts, but d20 modern basic classes are perfect as starting levels for low-magic environments. They're more customizable than NPC classes, but much more limited than PC classes. Really, the only thing that needs to be changed to fit them into D&D is the set of bonus feats offered.

 

[jensun]

I have seen a few attempts which have worked in those games. They may not work in yours of course.

Halve all spell progression for full casters.
- the hghest spell level available goes to 5 making "issue" spells such as raise dead and teleport a truly rare ability. Far fewer save or dies although still plenty of save or suck spells. If you also half caster level then direct damage spells will become completely useless.

Remove all item creation feats.
- increases the rarity of particular items significantly. Also probably removes all magic item selling as their is a finite supply.

Make the adept the base and only full spellcasting class.
- this may well produce a degree of resentment from your players at being forced into an npc class

Require all spellcasters to take a number of non caster levels as part of their progression.
- I really would avoid forcing them into any particular one and certainly not into an npc class.

While all of these solutions are possible the difficulty you will run into is that the Core 3e (and 1 and 2e for that matter) rules are not written as being a particularly low magic setting.

I would suggest looking into a different game or system such as d20 Modern

 

[Celebrim]

This is my experience: YMMV.

Levels 1st-6th: Fighters and rogues are dominating classes. Spellcasters don't have enough spells per day, the spells tend to be fairly weak, and they don't compared to the potential damage output of fighter build. Arcane casters in particular are very fragile and easily broken and are difficult to protect.
Levels 7th-12th: Spell-casting classes begin to compete on equal terms with non-spellcasting classes, and when they 'unload' they are the stars of the show. They've got sufficient spells and more importantly a few very big spells. Arcane casters have enough items that they can protect themselves and can stay active every round by expending wand charges.
Levels 13th+: I don't have alot of experience at these heights, but my sense based on what I have and what has been reported is at these levels, spell-casting classes begin to dominate play and that fighters and rogues begin to fall behind.

Some thoughts:
* The problem should ideally be partially offset by the fact that spell-casting classes are spending XP on spells and crafting feats, so that they lag the non-spell casting classes slightly in advancement. In practice this is not usually the case because of the easy access to items by simply purchasing them, and in any event it would probably never be more than a 1/2 level or so - not enough to really make a difference.
* The problem is partially offset by 'fixing' non-spell casting classes by giving them more feats and better feats at higher levels. For example, I believe the fighter should have a 2:3 advancement on bonus feats rather than 1:2, which gives them like three extra feats. With the right sort of feats available only to those with a high BAB, this partially offsets.
* The problem could be partially offset by tweaking the levels of certain spells slightly, a process started in 3.X but which needs further refining.
* To a certain extent, the problem of spell-casters really shining at high level is not so much a problem as a feature given that in my experience they sorta suck (by comparison) at low level. In a way, its only fair that after suffering through low levels they shine at high level play. 3rd edition went a long way toward given a 1st level wizard something to do at 1st level, but believe me when I tell you that against any sort of harsh DM its still almost impossible to get a wizard up to 6th level to begin with. I've had players take to multiclassing into 'useless' fighter type classes at low level purely to have the hit points to survive to get a wizard to survive to higher levels. This effectively implements the requirement that they take a certain amount of non-spellcaster levels that some are making.
* Even at high levels, arcane spell casters can be extremely fragile - especially without alot of protective items and CON boosting equipment. They can take crafting feats to make these, but that's again spending XP. And, even so, I suspect that they are still going to want 'meat shields'. An arcane caster is probably the most powerful class when prepared, but they are extremely vulnerable to suprise, to being worn down, and to a random critical hit.

 

[Quartz]

IMHO primary spellcasters should expect to be at least half a level, if not a level and a half behind the non-spellcasters due to XP spent on creating magic items. Note that due to the way XP is calculated, this is actually to the spellcaster's benefit. At low levels, PC wizards should be scribing scrolls and brewing potions. PCs should have bandoleers of both. At about 7th level, they'll have several wands of their own creation.