Rate Class Balance

[Lasher Dragon]

Ahhh I see. I usually don't have that problem, as I said I get into a lot of 32+ point campaigns, some even crazier than that. To me, the importance of a monk's stats go somewhat like this (from most important down):

Wis
Dex
Con
Str

Also nice to pick up weapon finesse on some builds

 

[brehobit]

@brehobit: That goes for all spellcasters in general... the more encounters per day, the weaker they are (and the stronger Fighters and Warlocks get).

Bye
Thanee

I agree, but because psions can "blow their wad" so much faster than a normal caster I think the issue is more pronounced for them.

 

[Doctor Shaft]

ah... the point buy system. I can see why we were having such different views on the subject now.

I typically play a monk that runs on the 23/25 point-buy system, in low-magic worlds where magical items are also highly specialized.

So, yeah, you're right. A high level, high stat monk is a really powerful class in D&D, especially if you allow them to trick out on items. I still believe that the other classes can find clever ways to hold their own against them, but I'll free admit they're immediately one of the best if you have high stats to help you.

But, if you keep the stat points low, and restrict items, they tend to suffer more.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

ah... the point buy system. I can see why we were having such different views on the subject now.

I typically play a monk that runs on the 23/25 point-buy system, in low-magic worlds where magical items are also highly specialized.

So, yeah, you're right. A high level, high stat monk is a really powerful class in D&D, especially if you allow them to trick out on items. I still believe that the other classes can find clever ways to hold their own against them, but I'll free admit they're immediately one of the best if you have high stats to help you.

But, if you keep the stat points low, and restrict items, they tend to suffer more.

I think this is generally true. The more a class relies on multiple ability scores, the greater the change in power you get when you go from low to high point buy. However, the standard 4d6-drop-lowest translates into about 30 points if you compensate for "hopeless" characters (as people with lots of time and some programming skills have demonstrated on these very boards a couple of times). So there's your standardized benchmark.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I think this is generally true. The more a class relies on multiple ability scores, the greater the change in power you get when you go from low to high point buy. However, the standard 4d6-drop-lowest translates into about 30 points if you compensate for "hopeless" characters (as people with lots of time and some programming skills have demonstrated on these very boards a couple of times). So there's your standardized benchmark.

If you roll the dice there is also a self-selection effect that you do not get in point buy. When you roll well you can exploit your good luck. When you roll badly, you avoid builds that will work poorly.

Any character can benefit from 2 high stats. Some are perfectly viable with two decent stats and not much else. But if you luck out and roll 3 or more 16+ stats, the Paladin and Monk and Rogue classes start looking very, very attractive. Those three classes can really exploit high stats to the hilt.

Point buy guarantees averagish luck. The Monk and Paladin are so-so with average luck. I would not bother ever playing those two classes with any less than 32 point buy (or a good set of rolls).

I love Paladins, but there were severe issues in 3.0 and a few minor ones in 3.5. Every time there is a discussion about balance seems like someone would take the position "Paladins just completely rock. They are heap powerful!" Only later one it always turns out that they were doing something like 5d6 drop lowest 2. Always.

Ditto for all the "Monks are too powerful!" threads.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think the core classes ar more or less on par with power. There are some issues at certain levels, at least to me it still seems that Clerics at low levels have a slight advantage over everyone else; Sorcerers seem better than Wizards at 1st level, then behind from 2nd to around 6th-8th, and after that almost as good. Bard is a mixed bag (and I cannot say anything at high levels), always seem to be a good addition to the party, but for the others, not for themselves.

However in general I think they are all fine, especially since the difference between players' ability are larger, and therefore the results vary a lot.

On the other hand I have more concern for non-core base classes. For instance the Hexblade, the Shaman, the Favoured Soul, the Warmage and the Warlock often sounds me quite more powerful than core counterparts, while the Samurai instead seems definitely weaker than a Fighter for example.

 

[Thanee]

I don't think the non-core classes are so bad (Psion being the prime exception, of course ). The Favored Soul is on par with the Cleric, the Warmage is weaker than both Sorcerer and Wizard all things considered, the Hexblade or the Swashbuckler both seem to be nice, but hardly broken, same with the Warlock, etc.

And yes, a class, that makes use of multiple abilities is certainly more better () in relation to a class, that only needs one or two of them, if you have better stats overall. That is, a monk gains more by going from 25 PB to 36 PB than a wizard, for example.

I don't think, however, that this makes such a big difference to the way the classes relate to each other in the end, since all classes can at least use four or even five of the six ability scores very good. Fighters also gain an advantage (and be it only more options in feat choice, among some obvious ones), if they can put decent scores in Dex, Int and Wis as well as high ones in Str and Con. And it's still an advantage, if you only need to boost up one of them with magic to gain every benefit there is instead of two or three.

Bye
Thanee

P.S. 23 PB!?

 

[Doctor Shaft]

Don't ask. I don't know what I was talking about. I was writing 25 PB and something got stuck in my head as if I'd played something weird and even lower than that. That's not the case. I think was trying to say 25/28. I know there's a variation on it. Forgotten Realms does more than standard, right?

Either way, it's still low when you have MAD.

 

[scipio]

Wow, there is a significant consensus that clerics are the most powerful class. I'm truly shocked. Seeing them in action, on either side of the combat, has never revealed this secret to me.

In fact, IMC, I created a pantheon of spirits for clerics that grant powers at specific levels, just to entice my players into selecting cleric - not 1 out of the 7 bit (and 3 of them have had to make characters a second time). Our power-gamer tried once with a cleric, one of the above home-brews. He spend about 3-4 rounds of a combat against a BBEG buffing himself. BBEG made all his spellcraft checks and hit the cleric with a devestating dispel at just the right moment, then his character was killed by a fireball trap (bad reflex saves).

I've been testing all my "broken" priests as opponents to the party, and they have fared poorly as well (even fully buffed - they are desperately lacking in the feat and skill departments). So apart from high level harm and destruction spells, which are easily matched by high level wizard spells, what makes the cleric the best, armor?

 

[Doctor Shaft]

I think it's their ability to do everything that makes them powerful. I think it's clear that they aren't the best at doing combative things, but it's their potential to do great things in combat that makes them strong.

But admitedly, the classes are pretty well balanced. It's easy to look at what Clerics can do in 3.5 and say that they have lots of powers. And I think that much is true. You can do a lot of things with a cleric. But overall, you're right. They're feat choices are usually very limited, especially if you want to be effective as a "cleric" and not just a fighter.

If you optimize yourself to be a fighting cleric, you can be pretty devestating, but I too would never say that a cleric is overly special.