Hopefully we don't descend into people picking apart someone's "banned" list again. I for one appreciate someone being able to actually post what's banned in their game and won't begrudge anyone for banning X or allowing Y. I may get snarky about psionics for instance, but I don't think there's anything wrong with someone using it in their game.
I for one am intrigued by ashockney's suggested modification list. I think one thing his list illustrates is the two schools of thought on how to "fix" the system and why we "ban" things in the first place. I think nearly everyone universally agrees that spellcasters and magic in generally is is at least a bit "unbalanced" at higher levels (of course it's always been that way to some extent - the logic behind the old ediitons was requiring more XP to advance and paying some serious dues at low levels as a caster). The question is always "what to do about it". One response is to make melee classes more "magical" the other to trim down on magical power.
I think it all rests with personal preference and how the game you run is played. I've said many times I value low-power games. So my variations will be different from your own. My conditions for "balancing" a spell or item or class even depend on many factors and usually how that combination relates to the group we have at the table. Anyway, I think modifications for your game (such as the very lengthy list of spells suggested) is probably the way to go instead of flat "banning" things. However, I also still make the distinction between a "ban" and "this just doesn't fit into the campaign". I know it's a bit of a fine line, but I think DM's should have creative license over the setting to some extent.
I for one am intrigued by ashockney's suggested modification list. I think one thing his list illustrates is the two schools of thought on how to "fix" the system and why we "ban" things in the first place. I think nearly everyone universally agrees that spellcasters and magic in generally is is at least a bit "unbalanced" at higher levels (of course it's always been that way to some extent - the logic behind the old ediitons was requiring more XP to advance and paying some serious dues at low levels as a caster). The question is always "what to do about it". One response is to make melee classes more "magical" the other to trim down on magical power.
I think it all rests with personal preference and how the game you run is played. I've said many times I value low-power games. So my variations will be different from your own. My conditions for "balancing" a spell or item or class even depend on many factors and usually how that combination relates to the group we have at the table. Anyway, I think modifications for your game (such as the very lengthy list of spells suggested) is probably the way to go instead of flat "banning" things. However, I also still make the distinction between a "ban" and "this just doesn't fit into the campaign". I know it's a bit of a fine line, but I think DM's should have creative license over the setting to some extent.