What would you say is the biggest problem with Wizards, Clerics, Druids, and other "Tier 1" Spellcasters?

[Elf Witch]

Thus, even a 1st level druid with even a 15 Wis (+2), 4 ranks Handle Animal (+4) only needs a 4 or better to command an animal companion to attack, and can do it as a free action. A "better build" druid could reduce the number needed even quicker. It's very easy to have a first level druid that can't fail the check, and by 4th level (6th level when the animal is wounded), the need for a check goes away completely without even trying hard.

I will say, I have only had one druid player (out of 3) who did abusive things with his druid (spells and wildshape into an air elemental) - and even then it was not with animal companion. But the potential for abuse is there.

* Note: “Push” an Animal: To push an animal means to get it to perform a task or trick that it doesn’t know but is physically capable of performing. This category also covers making an animal perform a forced march (PHB, p74)

It is not perfect but I have seen druids fail the roll. Again the problem here is how easy it to max out skills the really imo screwed this up as well as making the checks to easy. This is why we play with the roil a 1 it is a minus 10. Even with how easy it is to I have seen many DMs not call for the roll.

I have also see an animal companions killed by foes when they attack as a DM I don't hesitate to kill companions or families if they enter combat.

I have yet to see a druid played in an abusive way though I can see how it can happen. The class that I started dreading was the rogue I am so sick of thieves who do more damage than fighters become almost impossible to hit and steal everything not laid down even if it means screwing over their party.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

If you're dreading rogues that's probably more of an indication of the people you play with, especially if they're stealing stuff and screwing over the party. D&D is still a team effort, and just because someone is a rogue doesn't give them a license to be a douchebag.

As far as what's wrong with T1 classes, it's the combination of power and versatility. The designers wanted to give those classes options and went overboard because the archetypes are so broad as far as cleric, druid, and wizard go.

 

[Elf Witch]

If you're dreading rogues that's probably more of an indication of the people you play with, especially if they're stealing stuff and screwing over the party. D&D is still a team effort, and just because someone is a rogue doesn't give them a license to be a douchebag.

I have a rule don't play with jerks, but I have noticed that players who are normally really good team players when they play anything other than a rogue see to lose that ability when it comes to rogues. It seems that the most popular way to play one is as an amoral out for himself chaotic neutral. By its nature rogues are really encouraged to be team players they scout ahead ,they are the best when it comes to finding loot often using their high slate of hand to pocket things not seen by the rest of the party.

Whats the use of having that skill if you don't ever use it. A lot of players feel it is okay to take extra loot because they are the ones taking the biggest risk when it comes to opening doors and dealing with traps. And if is just a little extra gold that is fine but often it starts becoming magic items that would better benefit the party in someone else hands.

Also the stereotypical rogue is a thief someone out for himself who doesn't really believe in the law. the class is sort of set up to be the bad boy of classes.

 

[delericho]

Well, first up, I really don't like the 'tier' system. It has some elements of truth in it, but the arguments used to establish that are badly flawed. In particular, the author's dismissal of most counter-arguments by saying that that other person is clearly just better at optimising some classes than others, while failing to recognise that that also applies to himself is rather ironic.

That said, there is some truth in its conclusions - and in particular, those spellcasters are indeed more powerful than other characters, especially when supplements are used.

Scrolls are too cheap by the rulebooks. Thanks to this cheapness, the Wizard (and Sorcerer too) can amass such a horde of scrolls with their enormous disposable income (Not really needing weapons or armor like most other classes do), and will always have something that can resolve the encounter/situation without really any effort.

It's not just scrolls. Primary spellcasters have pretty much exactly the wrong number of spells per day - too few at the lowest levels and too many at the highest. Plus, by crafting scrolls (or that wand of cure light wounds) they can effectively bypass the Vancian casting that is the primary balancing factor of the classes.

Additional problems:

- Non-casters gain power at a little more than a linear rate. Casters gain power on three different axes - they get more spells per day, they get access to higher-level spells, and all their existing spells become more powerful as well.

- Non-casters are more gear-dependent than Casters... and yet it is Casters who actually have the ability to craft the items that they need. (That said, the treasure tables favour "items for non-casters" in found treasure.)

- The range of supplemental material has heavily favoured Casters. Improved options for Non-casters have been much thinner on the ground, and have frequently taken the form of replacements for older Non-caster options.

Otherwise, some other consensus I received was that if the GM were to enforce Spell Components, such as Material Components, Focuses, XP, and others, then a lot of issues that people have with the wizard will likely become a lot less of an issue. But also to enforce the rarity of certain spell focuses too- for example, the Transform spell, which is a 9th level spell, requires a Jade Circlet thats worth up to 10,000gp.

There's a lot of truth in this. A great many of the abuses come about because the spells aren't applied exactly as written. I became quite sensitive to this because I was "fortunate" enough to have one player who would always be quick to tell me all the good stuff his spells could do, and yet would somehow always 'forget' all the limitations and side-effects. Plus, he was prone to all manner of "logical" extrapolations of spell effects, neglecting to consider that the reason it's magic is that it's not logical.

Studiously applying all of those restrictions and not allowing extrapolations that aren't written in the spell descriptions goes a long way towards fixing the problem.

The other thing that heavily favours Casters is the fifteen minute work day - if the Casters can safely nova and then rest, they'll obviously outshine the Non-casters. However, if the other members of the group (including, but not limited to, the DM) refuse to humour this approach then the Casters are forced to shepherd their resources better.

(Unfortunately, this makes using published adventures much harder, because these usually assume optimised play, which in turn means using the 15mAD.)

--

Ultimately, if I were inclined to 'fix' 3e, I would do so by:

- merge all the Non-caster classes into one (turning Rage, Sneak Attack, and even the monk's Unarmed Combat into feat/power chains).

- Add more higher-level feats, so that Non-casters get vastly powerful abilities at higher levels. (The effect of these two is to make Non-casters both more flexible and also to boost the one bit of their progression that is above-linear in nature.)

- Remove all level-dependent variables from spells. That is, a fireball does 5d6 damage, regardless of the level of the Wizard. These can still be boosted with metamagic, but only with metamagic. (This eliminates one of the three axes by which a Caster gains power with level, reducing them from a cubic to a quadratic progression - the same as Non-casters.)

- Give the Casters more spells at lower level, and far fewer spells at high level.

- Change scrolls and wands so that instead of giving the Caster a "free cast" of the spell, they instead allow him to spontaneously cast the appropriate spell by sacrificing another of the same level.

- Re-write item crafting so that it actually has the mathematical rigour that it currently pretends to have. Also, open item crafting up so that any character can potentially craft items.

- Go through the spells and magic items with a fine tooth comb. Most of them are now (probably) fine, but I would feel the need to check.

 

[delericho]

I have a rule don't play with jerks, but I have noticed that players who are normally really good team players when they play anything other than a rogue see to lose that ability when it comes to rogues. It seems that the most popular way to play one is as an amoral out for himself chaotic neutral.

Isn't that just the most popular way to play a PC?

Also the stereotypical rogue is a thief someone out for himself who doesn't really believe in the law. the class is sort of set up to be the bad boy of classes.

Obviously, this isn't really a balance issue, and is something that can only really be fully resolved by the group at the table. That said, I do wonder if the class couldn't be improved by a name change to "Scoundrel", and by playing up the Han Solo aspects of the character over the "amoral thief" aspects? (Of course, more than a decade after the books were published is a bit later to make the change, but still... )

 

[Neonchameleon]

1: Reinstitute the Soft-Cap levels as in AD&D; in AD&D the game changed at level 10 or so and the fighter was given an entire army as a class feature. You weren't playing the same game at all at that point - instead of adventurers you were playing politics. (E6 works even better here as the wizard's been buffed).

2: Return to old treasure distribution - scrolls and wands are rare and hard to make, magic swords plentiful.

3: Return to old resting rules or possibly put a variant of them in. The dungeon is far too dangerous to rest in (a wandering monster roll every 10 minutes for an 8 hour rest?), and the wilderness is much more dangerous than the dungeon. Which means the correct place to rest is only at a base camp. Your spells therefore don't last an adventuring day, they last an adventure. (I'd hard code this that a wizard needs to spend a day in a fully stocked lab or library, a cleric needs to spend a whole day in a temple, and a druid in a grove - does the same job as the wandering monster table).

4: Restrict spells known. The wizard does not automatically know two spells per level of the player's choice, and the cleric and druid do not get all magic from all sources. Once more returning things to the way they were done before 3.X.

5: Bring back the drawbacks. Polymorph has a system shock check to avoid death. Fly ends abruptly. Teleport can get you killed. The powerful spells had drawbacks because they were big guns you only use with your back to the wall.

6: Make the best way to take the bad guys out to be to go through their hit points - not to nerf them inito insensibility then have the fighter take out the effective punchbag. The way it was - my suggestion is that everyone gets a bonus to all three saves equal to their hit dice (making affecting a high level target almost impossible - again a reversion).

Do all this and wizards, clerics and druids will still be among the most powerful characters in the game.

 

[Neonchameleon]

1: Reinstitute the Soft-Cap levels as in AD&D; in AD&D the game changed at level 10 or so and the fighter was given an entire army as a class feature. You weren't playing the same game at all at that point - instead of adventurers you were playing politics. (E6 works even better here as the wizard's been buffed).

2: Return to old treasure distribution - scrolls and wands are rare and hard to make, magic swords plentiful.

3: Return to old resting rules or possibly put a variant of them in. The dungeon is far too dangerous to rest in (a wandering monster roll every 10 minutes for an 8 hour rest?), and the wilderness is much more dangerous than the dungeon. Which means the correct place to rest is only at a base camp. Your spells therefore don't last an adventuring day, they last an adventure. (I'd hard code this that a wizard needs to spend a day in a fully stocked lab or library, a cleric needs to spend a whole day in a temple, and a druid in a grove - does the same job as the wandering monster table).

4: Restrict spells known. The wizard does not automatically know two spells per level of the player's choice, and the cleric and druid do not get all magic from all sources. Once more returning things to the way they were done before 3.X.

5: Bring back the drawbacks. Polymorph has a system shock check to avoid death. Fly ends abruptly. Teleport can get you killed. The powerful spells had drawbacks because they were big guns you only use with your back to the wall.

6: Make the best way to take the bad guys out to be to go through their hit points - not to nerf them inito insensibility then have the fighter take out the effective punchbag. The way it was - my suggestion is that everyone gets a bonus to all three saves equal to their hit dice (making affecting a high level target almost impossible - again a reversion).

Do all this and wizards, clerics and druids will still be among the most powerful characters in the game.

 

[Bluenose]

Stop playing 3rd edition. The problem isn't as noticeable in older versions.

More seriously, the problem is both spells and Vancian casting. Spells are incredibly versatile, capable of doing lots of things that aren't possible with mundane skill and of doing virtually anything that is possible with mundane skill - but better. Casters then get to decide which set of mundane abilities they'll be better at one day, and are entirely free to pick a different set the next. When you combine greater versatility than other classes (casters have this by mid-levels) with the ability to change your abilities from day to day (Vancian casting gives that from first) with your power level is high (because spells are simply better than skills) and there aren't any real difficulties in what you do (spell failure is not a D&D thing) then it's hardly a surprise that Tier 1 Classes are superior to the ones that get none of those things.

 

[N'raac]

I'd say that the five minute work day is the biggest problem. Resting and recharging all your spells is far too easy in 3.5, often at no penalty whatsoever to the party. Remove the spells that give wizards safe extradimensional spaces they can sleep in, and lower the number of spells recharged when resting in an uncivilised area.

Or just run a game that enforces limits. Maybe you don't have unlimited time to accomplish your goals - after a day or two, the bad guys will accomplish a goal and move on. Perhaps someone has **gasp** broken the Stasis Spell that keeps everyone and everything in the dungeon frozen in time until the PC's open a door or otherwise enter their immediate area, so they prepare and reinforce after a first strike takes out their advance guard.

Maybe the prevalence of hiding in extradimensional spaces has led to tactics against that. We track them to the point their footprints just disappear. There's a bunch of footprints circling this one little area. Maybe a Dispel Magic in the air above that point will yield some results? Maybe we should just dig a pit, or build a bonfire, under that point? Maybe we should just disperse back into the woods 50 to 100 feet back, surrounding that area, get some nice cover and concealment, and wait for the rope to fall out, at which time we can start taking pot shots at the fellows climbing down the rope. If they climb back up, just wait - they'll all fall out sooner or later. Rope Trick isn't the unbeatable safe haven many seem to think it is.

At the extreme, if your players are insistent on the one encounter work day, you can make encounters less frequent and more powerful. That seems to be the approach taken by the Zeitgeist path, at least the lower levels our group has played through. We don't have 3 - 5 combat encounters clustered together, but the one or two we might have in sequence are a lot tougher than those 3 - 5 Dungeon Crawl encounters typically were.

I have a rule don't play with jerks, but I have noticed that players who are normally really good team players when they play anything other than a rogue see to lose that ability when it comes to rogues. It seems that the most popular way to play one is as an amoral out for himself chaotic neutral. By its nature rogues are really encouraged to be team players they scout ahead ,they are the best when it comes to finding loot often using their high slate of hand to pocket things not seen by the rest of the party.

Whats the use of having that skill if you don't ever use it. A lot of players feel it is okay to take extra loot because they are the ones taking the biggest risk when it comes to opening doors and dealing with traps. And if is just a little extra gold that is fine but often it starts becoming magic items that would better benefit the party in someone else hands.

Also the stereotypical rogue is a thief someone out for himself who doesn't really believe in the law. the class is sort of set up to be the bad boy of classes.

That's a player problem, IMO. The stereotypical rogue in the source material doesn't screw over his friends or teammates. "I'm just role playing my character" is often best addressed by "Why did you design a character who is a jerk?" or "And I'm just role playing MY character's reactions to your character's actions". Remove the PC halo and ask why the other adventurers would put up with this jerk? There are gradations between "open lethal violence" and "he's a trusted member of the team". For example "we put it to a vote, and Tony the Thief is no longer welcome with the group." He can either leave, or keep up as best he can with no assistance from the rest of the party (how long will he last with no healing, buffing, melee assistance, etc.)? Maybe your NEXT character will be more of a team player.

 

[Ramaster]

The main advantage of tier 1 classes is the availability and VIABILITY of different roles within the same class, often simultaneously.

Barbarians are really angry guys who take a f*ton of damage before falling and deal a bunch of it within melee range. This is true at level 1, at level 5, at level 10 and at level 20.

Wizards, on the other hand, are very fragile and a bit limited in scope and power when they are level 1 (there are ways to optimize them so that they are not, none the less). But by level 5, they are summoners, battlefield controllers, debuffers, buffers, utility casters, blasters and masters of stealth and/or mobility all practically at once! And you don't even have to be optimizing that much to accomplish it, you might as well be playing core.

Druids and clerics are just that bad or even worse (Druid is, IMO, are the most powerful class in the game since it can do literally EVERYTHING better than almost everyone else by mid level).

A reduction in their scope and overall power level is in need. 4e brought some problems to the table, but balance between casters and non-casters is not one of them.