Class revisions

[Victim]

The problem with the cleric is that they are expected to spend lots of spells healing other people. No other class really has a built in tax on abilities. In order to make the cleric worthwhile as something besides a walking band-aid, he needs to have extra abilities to compensate for the healing spells. I noticed that my cleric seemed much weaker when the whole group (6 other players) than when we had only a couple people. When doing the healing/buffing thing (and I actually went to great pains to minimize healing), the other characters have a claim on the cleric's spells. They need all their advantages.

Which of course can make the cleric monstrously powerful in some circumstances.

 

[Stalker0]

Well I guess I should jump in on this one with my opinions.

Paladin: Paladin spells are a lot better than many give them credit for, but I agree the paly should get extra smites. Some other ideas would be to give them additional powers against evil as they gain in level. For example, a pseudo protection from evil the paladin has on all the time, or the ability to stun evil creatures. The paly really doesn't need an overhaul, just a few things here and there at higher levels to make them more attractive and they are fine.

Monk: I think most everyone agrees ki strike is the big problem here. One idea I haven't heard would be to allow ki strike to reduce the damage reduction, no matter what type it is.

For example, at 4th level, the monk gets DR reduction of 5. So no matter if the DR is 15/+1 20/+5 10/holysilver etc, the DR is 5 less than it was when the monk hits it. Then at higher levels, that changes to DR reduction of 10, 15, etc.

I also think that going the OA route of customizing the monk could be a good idea, but its not necessary for balance. Once the ki strike is fixed, I think monk's do just fine in combat.

Bard: The bard needs at least 6 skill points, period. I think WOTC can go one of two ways in upping the bard, either upping the bardic music, spells, or both. It would be nice if there was some bardic music that could cause damage, or deafen. Also, I think having bardic music that emulates the emotion spell in the phb would make a lot of sense for the bard. In increasing the bard's spell power, I think the power of there spells is fine, except that the spell's are boring. The bard's spellcasting is very different from the other spellcasters and should be reflected by having "original spells." Take modify memory for example, very very cool spell, bard only, makes me proud to be a high level bard. A few more of those kinds of spells and the bard is fine.

Druid: The druid on the whole is fine where it is. However, I don't think there is any elemental spell in the phb that the druid shouldn't have. That change, and maybe giving the druid a few more elemental spells would be fine. Also don't forget, since the MM is being changed, the druid may have a lot more creatures to take as companions.

Rogue: The only reason I mention this is because I hear a lot of people say that if you up the skill points of some other classes, you step on the rogue's toes. Well considering the rogue has sneak attack, evasion, uncanny dodge, the best skill list in the game, and some very cool special abilitiies- the rogue is completely fine, and I don't think those rogue lovers out there would suddenly scream that the rogue is now too weak if some other classes got a few more skill points.

Sorcs: Just take away the increase casting time for metamagics please!! Is it so bad that a sorc can cast a quickened fireball? Sorcs are flexible because they can choose spells on the fly. Metamagics are flexible because they can adjust a spell for a different setting. It seems like the two were made for each other, and then the crap with increased casting time.

Ranger: Ah yes, the poor debated ranger. If you listen to most of the veterens around here, the two "real" problems with the ranger are that's it frontloaded, and there no real flavor to the class. Frontloaded is fairly easy to fix, flavors the problem. 6 skill points helps, it lets a ranger actually use many of his skills. I don't think bonus feats are the way to go, now the ranger can be cool by being a fighter wannabe. In some ways, he's already a druid wannabe. I think a good fix for the ranger would be to grant him special abilities against his favored enemies. For example, any favored enemy that is +3 or higher for the ranger might have to make a will save when fighting the ranger or be shaken. Cool things that you can see in the combat, not just "oh wow, +2 to damage". However, if you are going the bonus feat route (it is a fairly easy way to go), make the bonus feats completely unique to the ranger. Don't give him an abridged fighter list, give him all new feats for his favored enemies, maybe the favored terrain everyone likes, some stealth abilities, things of that nature.

 

[Andion Isurand]

BARD: I would avoid giving the bard more skill points. They already have...... two good saves & 6 (7) arcane spell levels.
(as compared to the rogue seen below)

Besides, bardic knowledge can make up for most of the knowledge skills anyway.

I was thinking of raising the bard's hit dice to d8. They would still comparable to divine spell casters, since bards would have fewer spell levels, fewer proficencies and arcane failure.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

DRUID: Wait to see the new animals available... wild shape abilities and animal companions will be affected.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

MONK: Might need a little more flexibility in choosing the "Monk-Style" class abilities. Look at OA for a few extra added flexibities. Ki strike needs some help to, but it shouldn't do all the work for you, at beating damage reduction. Monks are already pretty cool.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

ROGUE: Its a great class, but I consider its extra high skill points a class ability by itself that shouldn't be threatened.

It is a class with // d6 HD // average attack // single save // no spells // little armor.

For the rogue, its all about making it work with a few class abilties that improve over time..... and lots and lots of skill points.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

RANGER: I would concentrate solely on modifying the flexibility and progression of the ranger's existing class abilities instead.
I would remove the "two-weapon fighting" feat altogether, but not ambidexterity.

Why keep the Ranger's Ambidexterity feat?

"Out in the wild.... never depend solely on the use of your favorite hand.... because you might lose it."

 

[Li Shenron]

... well, they might have been, if rangers had any feat slots to spare.

Why do people seem to think that new feats are an instant fix for any perceived problems?

Well, they won't fix the problems of multiclassing, especially because the only requisite for those feats is usually "to have at least 1 favored enemy", which means that a Ranger1/ElseX will still be able to get those feats.

But I think that those MotW feats can turn the Favored Enemy feature in a more attractive ability.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

The problem with the cleric is that they are expected to spend lots of spells healing other people. No other class really has a built in tax on abilities. In order to make the cleric worthwhile as something besides a walking band-aid, he needs to have extra abilities to compensate for the healing spells. I noticed that my cleric seemed much weaker when the whole group (6 other players) than when we had only a couple people. When doing the healing/buffing thing (and I actually went to great pains to minimize healing), the other characters have a claim on the cleric's spells. They need all their advantages.

Which of course can make the cleric monstrously powerful in some circumstances.

Please every class has a tax on their abilities. Fighters, "Oh whoa is me, I have good feats, HP, BAB, and know how to use all these weapons and armor, I am expected to use my class abilities and HP on the front line where I get beat upon more than any others and all without a good will save so I'm constantly victimized by spells" Mage, "Oh whoa is me, I have all these spells I'm expected to use, blasting spells, utility spells and when I use them I am gone." ETC.

Clerics gain a fricken bonus, look at me not only am the baddest of the bad, I can also heal. Healing isn't a taxed ability any more than being a tank is a taxed ability. Its an extra power, and that's it. If some clerics go boo-hoo I have to heal, that's there fault. Clerics should say look at my awsome power I just healed your sorry butt.

Added tax and all that isn't real. It just plain comes down to, clerics aren't popular, lets uber them into the best class by far and maybe someone will play them.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

The "tax" on a Cleric of needing to heal other party members disappears at level 3 in any by the book campaign. At that point, the party can well afford a Wand of CLW -- completely relieving the Cleric of any requirement to use spells for healing between combats.

During combat, the Cleric is expected to be an effective contributor to the party. Whether that means casting healing on the wounded or unleashing Flame Strike or going into melee should be a matter of character concept and roleplaying.