Search results

Sorcerer: Well, skills dont really enter into mechanical balance that much to me, honestly...I see them as mostly an RP aid, and a way to flesh out your character (obviously, there are exceptions such as UMD). However, largely because of this, I'd have no problem with all classes getting more...

Monk: I think I agree. They seem to be meant as more or less a primary, up front melee, and if there going to be that, they should have full BAB Rogue: I'm not so sure about giving Rogue full BAB. They are not and have never been meant as front line combatants, and Sneak Attack even with its...

If we're discussing non core stuff at all...which we are to an extent, still using Core as the main baseline...then Persistent is an issue. Most of my issues do not involve spell combos or single spells on the Cleric list, in and of themselves. My main problem is with the package. Clerics get...

Well, I'm glad we cleared that up at least so... Why are we still having this problem then? What I am talking about is entirely relevent to this discussion, and has nothing whatever to do with "house rules". My "house rule" for Clerics is to remove them entirely and replace them with a...

Ok I think its pretty safe to say the Monk is going to have some issues. Anyone care to comment on how that might be fixed? Same for the Bard or Fighter itself, or the Sorcerer or any other you feel might need it. I really think the Class Defense Bonus and Armor as DR variants tend to give a...

Yea, they can trade a 7th level spell and an XP cost for a single casting of a single low to mid level Cleric spell. And UMD is a cross class skill based on an ability score that has little or no other use for a wizard (although it would for a Sorcerer). I guess I should have been more...

....I just really dont see a whole lot wrong with the Druid. If people say the Cleric spell list is limited and not all that great, then the Druids is worse. Yea they have good damage...but direct damage generally isnt that great a shakes especially at mid and higher levels. They are good...

You still dont get it. I'm not talking about "the rules as I write them." I am talking about possibilities/ideas/wishes for the future of the "rules as written" I see it all the time in General Discussion and here in rules. Speculations about 4th edition. Discussions of solutions to obvious...

I dont think it demonstrates that at all. Certainlly not "most" of the "charge". I think it demonstrates that the posters you mention have become extremely tired of how non-core material keeps adding more unbalanced options to the already unbalanced in core cleric. Althgough your right that...

Not to mention the stupid alignment restriction. But yea, if you want to be a spellcasting warrior in D&D you pretty much have to mutliclass and really need a prestige class like Spellsword too

If the Battle Sorcerer is "broken" then the Cleric is shattered into thousands of tiny peices. Clerics get better saves, better armor, and way more spells than a Battle Sorcerer, so if your DM disallows them, he needs to do something about the Cleric as well.

What I am talking about *is* a Rules discussion, not "house rules". "House rules" are how one has changed the game solely for the purposes of ones own campaign. In this thread, we are discussing class balance in the rules. We have in fact pretty much covered whats likely to get covered as far...

I think theres several things. I think some people feel they will be chained to using all of their resources on healing everyone else. I think some people dislike the whole concept of the "priest" archtype. Either they see it as a goody two shoes, or they dislike the idea of a character who has...

But Clerics can and do fight. So having armor is useful for them. See above. But it is still a disadvantage...you can only control your actions, not the Fighters. And eventually the Fighter types are going to want to...and should be able to..enter combat. At which point your AoEs become...

Umm...since when is BAB ever irrelevent? if this is the case, why not just give everyone full BAB? all you mention is "buff spells". Cleric really dont get that many buffs other than their self only ones. But they do get the best magical defense spells in the game...Spell Resistance, DW, FoM...

Only effecting humanoids is a limitation, but remember a great many main villains in campaigns are likely to be humanoids with class levels. How much of a weakness that is will depend a lot on the game. Its generally not considered a weak spell, that I've ever seen even since it was lowered in...

well, when I say "monk" (or any other class) I mean "monk" (or whatever other class). A mutlcclassed or prestige classed character isnt just a "monk" or a "whatever" anymore its a Monk/Whatever/Whatever. Certainly prestige classes make a difference, but they to me are seperate.

Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian. The only classes I'd say a Monk really had all that good a chance against would be Rogue, Bard, maybe Ranger, and maybe a Mage if the circumstances where right, as has been discussed here.

I really dont think the forum rules would prohibit us discussing problems in class balance, and then discussing possible ways to solve those problems (real or percieved or whatever). I dont really think a seperate thread is neccesary to do that, so I really dont see why you cant give you actual...

At low levels, thats often somewhat true. Especially as far as damage. Colour Spray and Sleep are very nice, and Scorching Ray etc. And certainlly Wizards are better at area-effect damage. Of course area effect damage is often a very poor strategy especially past very low levels. Clerics also...