Rank the D&D 3.5 classes!

[Maxperson]

Yep. High level campaigns are tough to dm, for sure. But it depends on the group. The DM could introduce a competing party that seems to get the loot first, each a designed antihero, or perhaps a betrayal of a trusted ally or safe place... I just think that the DM has to remain as interested in the challenge as the players.. and of course the need to pander to the exceptional.. but however it happens, the DM needs to maintain the risk of failure.

I've never found that high level campaigns are tough, but then I plan mine out to go from 1st to 15-20th level. The players pick the campaign focus during session -1, so they have buy in to what I put together before the game even starts. When the PCs hit high level, they are on the path they have chosen to walk and been walking for 14 levels and they don't stray from it very far. Yes, they can pop over to Sigil to look for an answer to something and perhaps throw me for a little loop, but I'm pretty good at improvising and believe in giving the players free reign to go and do what they want. Still, the primary challenge is there and has been planned out by me in accordance with the session -1 focus.

 

[James Gasik]

Of course, that rogue should probably have multiclassed and prestiged out of pocket picking a long time ago

Or just asked the DM if he could switch to being a Beguiler, Artificer, or Factotum instead, once those classes existed.

 

[glass]

I don't like hearing about how a class is too this or not enough that...

Then why have you posted in a thread on that subject about a dozen times?

_
glass.

 

[Beal]

I've never found that high level campaigns are tough, but then I plan mine out to go from 1st to 15-20th level. The players pick the campaign focus during session -1, so they have buy in to what I put together before the game even starts. When the PCs hit high level, they are on the path they have chosen to walk and been walking for 14 levels and they don't stray from it very far. Yes, they can pop over to Sigil to look for an answer to something and perhaps throw me for a little loop, but I'm pretty good at improvising and believe in giving the players free reign to go and do what they want. Still, the primary challenge is there and has been planned out by me in accordance with the session -1 focus.

That seems good to play. Having the group define the direction early on must help planning enourmously. I like open story as well. Generally, I'm just writing dungeons and npcs, and when the group sort of "decides" to adventure, something happens from the book I write. I keep a log of what's happened to aim for consistency and to keep a reference to the core story as they play. But you have to give the player freedom. Or theyre not playing DnD.

 

[Beal]

Then why have you posted in a thread on that subject about a dozen times?

_
glass.

I'm promoting the idea that there is balance, based on the group. I am advocating the opposite of good class/bad class

 

[James Gasik]

Then why have you posted in a thread on that subject about a dozen times?

_
glass.

They believe that inter-class balance is too nuanced for a list. I'm willing to acknowledge that the DM's job is to try and keep the game on even keel, but the truth is, the strengths and weaknesses of the 3e classes are very well understood at this point, and some require more handling than others. There is a gulf between the Complete Warrior Samurai and the Spell-to-Power Erudite or the Archivist that is very hard to cross without extreme levels of optimization or lack thereof on the player's side.

For a DM to cross that gulf will require something on the level of divine intervention.

 

[Maxperson]

That seems good to play. Having the group define the direction early on must help planning enourmously. I like open story as well. Generally, I'm just writing dungeons and npcs, and when the group sort of "decides" to adventure, something happens from the book I write. I keep a log of what's happened to aim for consistency and to keep a reference to the core story as they play. But you have to give the player freedom. Or theyre not playing DnD.

They absolutely have freedom. They can do what they want, when they want, assuming they want to pay the in-fiction consequences(if any). I've had them look at a site in the Forgotten Realms that had a name that seemed like it would help them with their current challenge and just decide to go there. Huh!? Okay, time to scramble and figure something out before they get there, because it's often a very good idea and advances things wonderfully.

 

[Beal]

They believe that inter-class balance is too nuanced for a list. I'm willing to acknowledge that the DM's job is to try and keep the game on even keel, but the truth is, the strengths and weaknesses of the 3e classes are very well understood at this point, and some require more handling than others. There is a gulf between the Complete Warrior Samurai and the Spell-to-Power Erudite or the Archivist that is very hard to cross without extreme levels of optimization or lack thereof on the player's side.

For a DM to cross that gulf will require something on the level of divine intervention.

That is a great point! Because while the balance of the adventure is the DMs responsibility, the character build is the responsibility of the player.

I agree completely that the benefits of some classes are more obvious, and that some things are yet to be discovered. So it's true that players need to make sure they are not the high level rogue, useless supporting a Psion, as their combat usefulness plateaued long ago. So if the team has no need for a high level rogue, then that is a failing on the player, because they have built a player that does not contribute. But does that make a high level rogue useless? That comes down to the story

 

[Beal]

So maybe what I mean is, that classes require a sertain measure of experience and understanding to be utilized

 

[James Gasik]

Which is, again, why lists like this exist. So you can go "ah, this class needs more experience to play well, and this class needs more help from the DM".

For example, if you go back to the early posts on this thread, it shows a lack of understanding of how the game would progress. Nothing against anyone who posted, it was still early to see how things would fall out, though a lot of the worst imbalances were right there in the PHB, with things like Polymorph Any Object, Wish, Miracle, Gate, and Simulacrum. Fabricate/Wall of Iron was totally a thing (not to mention the Shrink Item/Wall of Iron combo), and it only got worse when more books came out.

But it is true that a good DM and a conscientious player can make even a very unbalanced class perfectly fine. For example, my last 3.5 game, I told the DM that I was going to play a Divine Metamagic Persist Cleric, but I was only going to use Persist on buff spells that affected the entire party.

And once I got rolling, everyone's numbers skyrocketed, but since it affected the group, no one person got to steal the spotlight. My usual contribution to a fight was Fiery Burst, my reserve Feat, unless I needed to heal someone!

The DM was able to respond by upping the challenge of encounters, but it did eventually come to a head when he admitted that he had reached his limit once we hit level 11.

And not once did any of the players feel overshadowed by my character, in fact, one of them (admittedly, the least savvy character), would often ask what I even did!

To which I just pointed to the index cards in front of him with his various buffs. "That's what I do."