Out of curiosity, I've been digging around, and I've found a lot of people think the two most powerful characters in 3.5 are, in fact, the psion and the sorcerer.
I've also found that, in my 4e game, despite the hybrid characters in the group being noticably weaker then the pure-classed, the DM refuses to budge on his opinion that hybrid-classes are naturally more powerful then pure ones, and that he should've never allowed them.
The two reasons I've found for both examples is "it's easy" and "it's different."
In 3.x, the sorcerer, while pretty dang good, isn't as powerful as the wizard. However, he's easier to use, if you aren't trying to be optimized. This results in the sorcerer being a better "time to be awesome" class for new players then the wizard. While sorcerer is overall not as powerful, it's easier for a new player to reach higher levels of power. I've found that this makes a lot of DMs feel that the sorcerer IS more powerful - not because of anything inherent to the class, but simply because they've seen more awesome sorcerers then they have wizards. Making the world-breaking wizard can be irritating, and Vancian casting isn't known for it's robust and ease of use. As a result, if new players go with both classes, the sorcerer outshines the wizard.
4e hybrids are still relatively new. In my game, I'm a slightly maniacal halfling sorcerer/rogue pirate, and my IC buddy is a drunk shaman/druid. When combat starts, neither of us can be as awesome as the other players. However, the DM still doesn't get all the hybrid rules, and constantly insists that he want to nerf us because he's afraid we're too powerful. It's not exactly something new - the DM doesn't understand and, assuming the worst, declares it overpowered before actually looking at it.
The psion, that poor unlucky bastard, hits BOTH spots. Psionic points are easy and more understandable then Vancian casting. Lots of people don't know the rules behind psionics (see the neverending complaints of unlimited damage in one spell). They get smacked with a double whammy of DMs both assuming that, because it's more newbie friendly, and because it's weird and different, it must be more powerful. I've seen some people claim that the only reason anyone would make a psion is because it helps them powergame, because otherwise they'd just choose vancian casting.
To bring an actually point, I suppose, to this point: How can one stop both of these from happening? I like psions. I like my hybrid rogue/sorcerer. I don't think either is overpowered, and I've never stolen the show with either, but for me and several others, the DMs don't seem to care. How does one break these two ideas?
I've also found that, in my 4e game, despite the hybrid characters in the group being noticably weaker then the pure-classed, the DM refuses to budge on his opinion that hybrid-classes are naturally more powerful then pure ones, and that he should've never allowed them.
The two reasons I've found for both examples is "it's easy" and "it's different."
In 3.x, the sorcerer, while pretty dang good, isn't as powerful as the wizard. However, he's easier to use, if you aren't trying to be optimized. This results in the sorcerer being a better "time to be awesome" class for new players then the wizard. While sorcerer is overall not as powerful, it's easier for a new player to reach higher levels of power. I've found that this makes a lot of DMs feel that the sorcerer IS more powerful - not because of anything inherent to the class, but simply because they've seen more awesome sorcerers then they have wizards. Making the world-breaking wizard can be irritating, and Vancian casting isn't known for it's robust and ease of use. As a result, if new players go with both classes, the sorcerer outshines the wizard.
4e hybrids are still relatively new. In my game, I'm a slightly maniacal halfling sorcerer/rogue pirate, and my IC buddy is a drunk shaman/druid. When combat starts, neither of us can be as awesome as the other players. However, the DM still doesn't get all the hybrid rules, and constantly insists that he want to nerf us because he's afraid we're too powerful. It's not exactly something new - the DM doesn't understand and, assuming the worst, declares it overpowered before actually looking at it.
The psion, that poor unlucky bastard, hits BOTH spots. Psionic points are easy and more understandable then Vancian casting. Lots of people don't know the rules behind psionics (see the neverending complaints of unlimited damage in one spell). They get smacked with a double whammy of DMs both assuming that, because it's more newbie friendly, and because it's weird and different, it must be more powerful. I've seen some people claim that the only reason anyone would make a psion is because it helps them powergame, because otherwise they'd just choose vancian casting.
To bring an actually point, I suppose, to this point: How can one stop both of these from happening? I like psions. I like my hybrid rogue/sorcerer. I don't think either is overpowered, and I've never stolen the show with either, but for me and several others, the DMs don't seem to care. How does one break these two ideas?
