Class revisions

[avin]

It makes more sense to a ranger use bow, for hunting, than two weapons. I never understood the Drizzt lovers issue... anyway, I hope that they give more skills to Sorcerers and Bards. Bonus to skills by class is not a good idea, IMHO.

 

[mooby]

Great idea so far...

I think they should change the CLERIC.

I see a lot of people just take one level of Cleric (for the domain abilities) and be done with it. Too much IMHO.

The Cleric should get one domain at 1st level, and access to an additional domain every 4th or 5th level.

That would make them a little weaker at first, and more powerful in the end. Heck, why shouldn't a 20th level cleric have access to more domains?

Just taking one level of Cleric is still powerful (you get a domain, and minor healing spells, plus the ability to use wands of C_W -- good stuff!)

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Furthermore, _every_ class gets benefits at every level to some extent, via BAB, save and HD increases, and other level-based abilities (eg turning undead). Just because there's nothing listed on the "Specials" column of the level progression table doesn't mean they actually get nothing.

Yes...but the other side of that same coin is there may be nothing to lose by choosing to multiclass. You gain benefits not on the "specials" table no matter what you do, right?

You are correct that specials are not the only thing that counts. On paper, there are lots of nonspecials that improve for, say, the Ranger and Paladin. In fact, the marginal advantage of one more level of Ranger/Paladin usually looks pretty weak compared to taking a single level of something else.

Because all classes are frontloading to some extent, a stretch of more than 2 levels without a new toy is probably too long. (I am talking about the nonspellcaster specialists.)

From a design POV, either:
(1) Add more incentives for sticking to existing classes, e.g. give the Paladin more Smites.
(2) Take away incentives for jumping to other classes, i.e. reduce the frontloading across the board. (I speak of all the classes.)

 

[Aloïsius]

Monks and DR

I'm not sure they need a better ki ability to overcome damage reduction.
* DR value will be smaller in 3.5
* Rather than brute force, I would like that they give the monk more martial artist ability à la stuning fist/improved trip : add more options, may be some sort of sneak attack, or the ability found in Oriental Adventure...

 

[The Little Raven]

Re: Ranger Ability Progression: How I'd Do'em!

Table 3-13-OSR: The Old-Style Ranger

This has to be the most horribly unbalanced creations I have ever seen in my life. The class has about 30 benefits over 20 levels, and most of these are gained in the first three levels.

First off, it has a full fighter BAB (+20), which is fine. Then it adds in a great Fortitude save (+12), then gives you a strange Will save (+8, which I'm guessing is from the +2 Will class ability, but it should NOT be included in base Will save), while leaving your Reflex save (+6) the same. I imagine that a ranger would be more likely to dodge something than to resist a mind effect.

On top of that, the class has a stronger spell progression than the original class (0-4 instead of 1-4) with a greater number of spells per day (6/3/3/3/3 instead of 0/3/3/3/3). As if that isn't bad enough, you pile on levels of wizard spellcasting? I don't see rangers tossing around magic missiles.

Then you give it loads and loads of bonus feats (15 total), which is more than the fighter gets. This is just overloaded with far too many benefits to be balanced.

Do you even pay attention to the idea of balance?

 

[Steverooo]

Re: The O-SR

Heh!

Then you give it loads and loads of bonus feats (15 total), which is more than the fighter gets. This is just overloaded with far too many benefits to be balanced.

Do you even pay attention to the idea of balance?

Kinda like the Druid or Monk, huh?

 

[Li Shenron]

A very simple fix is to change Favored Enemy.

I think the Master's of the Wild feats for favored enemies were a very good start.

 

[Lord Rasputin]

DR, ki strike

I just saw the new Dragon at the FLGS. Here is how monks will earn ki strike:

4th bypass DR/magic
10th bypass DR/lawful
16th bypass DR/adamantite

It's not +1, +2, and so on; it's just DR 15/magic. A +6 or better weapon is epic, and there's DR lawful/chaotic/good/evil and a ton of exotic materials.

 

[hong]

I think the Master's of the Wild feats for favored enemies were a very good start.

... 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?

 

[WattsHumphrey]

Great idea so far...

I think they should change the CLERIC.

I see a lot of people just take one level of Cleric (for the domain abilities) and be done with it. Too much IMHO.

The Cleric should get one domain at 1st level, and access to an additional domain every 4th or 5th level.

That would make them a little weaker at first, and more powerful in the end. Heck, why shouldn't a 20th level cleric have access to more domains?

Just taking one level of Cleric is still powerful (you get a domain, and minor healing spells, plus the ability to use wands of C_W -- good stuff!)

I very much have to second mooby on this one. I find clerics to be massively powerful and the most versitile of the classes. (Though from a powergamy route, I'd take 3 levels of cleric instead of 1... as you get 2 bab just as if you'd gone fighter, plus level 2 spells for not that much cost. If you need the fighter feats, I understand, though ).

Giving clerics additional domains later in the game might be a good idea, but domains are where most of the power lies, so I'd go every 5 or 6 levels if this change were to come into effect. I might also suggest a weaker spell progression, but I'd have to playtest that to see if that would be going overboard on changes.

I suppose it just comes down to the fact that clerics get a lot of abilities currently (at all levels, but especially low levels) for comparitively few restrictions. As a GM I enforce a lot closer to a paladinish code for clerics than the book suggests, because then I feel these abilities are justified.