Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 Running the Realms
 Would this imbalance the game?
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

HALO_Project
Acolyte

12 Posts

Posted - 13 Aug 2017 :  19:02:11  Show Profile Send HALO_Project a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
Sorry, I couldn't fit the actual topic in the headline. My question is for classes like the Favored Soul, the Healer, the Spirit Shaman, etc that have more than one ability score governing their spellcasting (Cha/Wis/Int for Bonus spells and highest level cast and a different ability for Save DC) would it be terribly imbalanced if they just used a single ability score that would be appropriate to their class more in line with Wiz/Sor/Druid/Cleric?

One might argue that it is the addition of additional class features such as combat stuff for the Favored Soul, but to that I say they must balance physical abilities to keep those particularly effective as it is. (Plus Druids are swimming class features and spells.) Most classes have at least 2 abilities that are more or less really important to them, (more depending on how you play I suppose).

Also we borrowed the concept of Sorcerers getting class features from Pathfinder because we found in our games that no one ever continued to be a sorcerer, they always multiclassed into another spellcasting progression class ASAP because there was no benefit to staying a sorcerer. To encourage people to want to stay a sorcerer we said that everyone must choose a bloodline and then every five levels they get a bloodline feat (we altered a couple of them for balance and added a few to supplement some new bloodlines) and people are very happy with the results. Balance is fine because they are just getting class features from Sorcerer instead of prestige classes.

So to my original question: Is it terribly imbalanced to just choose a single score for all casters and leave it at that? There is some debate in our group on it and it has left us undecided at this time.

Thanks in advance.

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14016 Posts

Posted - 13 Aug 2017 :  19:33:39  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I personally don't think so, but I also tend to balance my games with 'DM caveat' (in a light-handed way, so people can't even tell), so your mileage may vary.

And if you are playing 3e, then I highly just recommend using Pathfinder whole-cloth. Its only a rules-set; you can still play in FR. Some folks argue its slightly more powerful (so when you convert things, PCs have an advantage), but so what? You PCs have more of a chance of survival? How is that bad thing? Its my job to entertain my group, NOT kill them off. And once-again, its also my job to maintain a balance in my games, not the rules. If they're winning too easily, then in walks another group of skeletons, or bugbears, or a Terrasque (depending on the group's levels).

Pathfinder is an excellent set of rules - its solid. Just use that (don't they also only use one stat for a class? Its been a while since I played with them).

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

HALO_Project
Acolyte

12 Posts

Posted - 13 Aug 2017 :  20:37:57  Show Profile Send HALO_Project a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I would LOVE to switch to Pathfinder outright but the group vetoed it because they (are too stubborn to try anything really new) refuse to nerf their level 40 characters because the XP equivalent is level 17ish or something like that. Too much conversion, they'd lose power blah blah blah fear of new stuff. Even though the alternative is retiring the characters and starting anew because the other DM and I can't keep devastating the world just so they have something to do. But we can steal stuff from Pathfinder and stick it in 3.5 to improve it. o_O

I totally agree that when I run I do not do so to KILL the PC's. I have killed them before but not because I decided it was time to just TPK the group hazzah! More it was because the player did something I pointedly said, "doing that will result in your untimely demise" and he did it anyway. I still allowed his resurrection but *sigh*.

I was thinking that it wasn't a big deal but wasn't sure and the group is so on fence about it. We send most rules that need a change through a vote. Usually it works pretty well, sometimes though... Sometimes they just don't give changes a chance (read (I WANNA RUN IN PATHFINDER!!!! lol).
Go to Top of Page

Arivia
Great Reader

Canada
2879 Posts

Posted - 15 Aug 2017 :  10:54:12  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Having a single score for casters isn't going to imbalance them with regards to other casters. Most casting classes are so far above in 3e that they'll be unbalanced with regards to non-casting classes, but that's just a thing in 3e.
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3402 Posts

Posted - 15 Aug 2017 :  17:17:13  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well it would certainly make those classes more playable, I'll say that. I don't understand the decisions of making multiple stats govern their spellcasting as it makes almost zero sense when compared to even just the standard Classes in the Player's Handbook. And to be honest, with the disparity between casters and non-casters in 3.5 as it is, I doubt making everything based off of one stat will do much more in terms of making it unbalanced.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14016 Posts

Posted - 17 Aug 2017 :  15:47:07  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Level 40?

They are WAY past the 'age of retirement'. No wonder they don't want to let go - you've 'enabled' them!

The highest anyone ever went in one of my games was lev. 25, and I was co-DMing with a friend (who was WAY too free with the EP's), but if anyone hit 30, I would have insisted they 'ascended to godhood' and roll a new character.

You know what? Its time for some 'tough love'. Switch to PF and make them roll new characters - they'll thank you for it in the long run (because how is anything fun when there are no challenges?) I stopped playing Fallout THREE TIMES because I became so powerful I could just wade-into any area and nothing could hurt me. It became a snore-fest to me. You're robbing them of that sense of accomplishment.

Just my 2

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
6260 Posts

Posted - 18 Aug 2017 :  01:18:52  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Some people think 10th level is "retirement age". Others think 20th level. Or 30th level.

"Retirement" at my tables would occur when the players (and DM) just got bored of the characters. You can keep devising creative new challenges, up to a point. You can rotate players through different characters/parties in different mini-campaigns or different aspects of the same campaign. You can keep things "fresh" and delay the inevitable for a long time. But not forever.

When the players (and DM) grow bored of the characters then it's time for retirement.
But if the characters are still interesting, people are still having fun, and the game is entertaining ... then keep playing!

There is no specific level for "retirement". Contrary to what is written at Candlekeep and in many of the rulebooks, lol.

[/Ayrik]
Go to Top of Page

RDS
Seeker

USA
25 Posts

Posted - 18 Aug 2017 :  12:37:20  Show Profile Send RDS a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik

Some people think 10th level is "retirement age". Others think 20th level. Or 30th level.

"Retirement" at my tables would occur when the players (and DM) just got bored of the characters. You can keep devising creative new challenges, up to a point. You can rotate players through different characters/parties in different mini-campaigns or different aspects of the same campaign. You can keep things "fresh" and delay the inevitable for a long time. But not forever.

When the players (and DM) grow bored of the characters then it's time for retirement.
But if the characters are still interesting, people are still having fun, and the game is entertaining ... then keep playing!

There is no specific level for "retirement". Contrary to what is written at Candlekeep and in many of the rulebooks, lol.



I stand with Ayrik. As long and you and they are still enjoying the game then run the characters to your hearts content. When someone starts getting bored have a discussion. My one 2nd Edition game got up to 15th level and one player felt we'd finally reached the fun peak of playing but the other 6 players were ready to start over. She still grumbles about that decision but then again she hates change and was a spellcaster to boot.

RDS
Go to Top of Page

Starshade
Learned Scribe

Norway
125 Posts

Posted - 18 Aug 2017 :  15:49:51  Show Profile Send Starshade a Private Message  Reply with Quote
lvl 15 in 2. edition? I knew someone who have DMed up to level 47 before retirement of the PC in AD&D 2. ed.
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
14016 Posts

Posted - 19 Aug 2017 :  20:41:36  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I was actually the lev. 25 character (I got to play him when the other guy DM'd, otherwise he'd just be an NPC the others got to 'boss around'). I never gave myself EP, but the other DM did - he gave it out like it was cocaine at a Charlie Sheen party.

I didn't like it - everything became too easy for us. It was almost impossible to challenge the party (especially my co-DM's character, who insisted on looking at all my notes, and then always had EXACTLY WHAT HE NEEDED prepared for every encounter). They were my friends, and I enjoyed hanging around with them, and we even had a few females in the group (that was a big deal back in those days), so I kept playing, but I just didn't enjoy the 'Monty Haul' ness of it all.

I personally feel the game starts to go south as soon as 9th level spells are available, but to each their own. Back in 1e/2e, the rest of the party became extraneous when the Mage was that powerful. Anyhow, just enjoy yourselves, and try to get them to switch to PF (if they are stuck on 3e/D20)- its not that different, and characters are slightly more powerful (that alone should convince them LOL).

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

Cards77
Senior Scribe

USA
549 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2017 :  00:56:58  Show Profile Send Cards77 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Pick up the Pathfinder Beginner Box. Run it as a one off. Maybe they will rediscover how fun it is to play at the lower levels.
Go to Top of Page

HALO_Project
Acolyte

12 Posts

Posted - 22 Aug 2017 :  15:38:20  Show Profile Send HALO_Project a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Our solution thus far is to finish off these really high level campaigns they are in, you know since we already wrote them out and all, and to have the characters retire to a mentor status. They have lands and titles they are barely keeping up with and all of them have children now. So they are going to start new characters with their kids. My co-DM and I are trying to convince them to start the new game of the legacy characters in the same setting, the Realms, but with the Pathfinder ruleset.

One of them is receptive. She says maybe but she wants to play in it with other characters first to see if the system is agreeable for her before she commits her new main PC to it so I'm running her in Carrion Crown (because she loves horror type stories) and so far she's liking it. But she's accepted the retirement and is even, to some degree, looking forward to playing the son or daughter of her character. High powered campaigns are somewhat long when it comes to battles and she enjoys the fluidity and challenge of lower level games.

The other player is growly about having to start a new character and let his old one go to start with. He thinks we should just be able to keep doing these ultra powerful campaigns and that's fine but then he complains when combat takes three hours to resolve because everything he fights either has a billion HP (not literally but you know what I mean) or because it can heal itself, it has DR, SR, high saves (because epic monsters are broken and have saves in the 50's and 60's and on up, one had a 72 I think o_O) and he hates all of that but he likes being able to play a character that is just so badass on paper. As my other player who is not my fellow D&D DM says, all he sees are numbers. So when we see that a character that is level 17 is freaking awesome in PF what he sees is that they are level 17 not level 37. It takes way too long to level up in PF. That is his chief complaint over a system he's never given a chance. Personally I feel like that is one of the things that makes PF more balanced. Oh and a mage or any other character that uses effects with a saving throw are not made obsolete by PF because the creatures are written out to match and challenge the PC's and not laugh off any little spell or effect that requires a save unless they roll a natural 1. And he hasn't even looked at the classes to see that they are all more powerful and more customizable than anything in 3.5. If he'd given it a chance and had legit complaints about it that would be one thing but he hasn't and, if left to his own devices, he won't. We're thinking the if other player gets onboard with PF then that's 3 out of 4 and he can join us or I guess game with someone else, though he doesn't know anyone else who runs 3.5 (thinking there's a reason for that... lol).

And as for my initial question, yeah I was thinking that it wasn't a big imbalance and I think we are going to just start doing that. We'll write up each one's altered stat based on which one we feel works the best for the class I think.
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2017 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000