The Battle for D&D 3.5

[Hotfoot]

Well folks, I played Pathfinder at GenCon, and while time has made me look at it a little more calmly, I can definitively say that I'm not really a fan. The setting didn't really grab me, and the rules feel like aimless modifications to the 3.5 rules set.

There are plenty of optional rules, but optional rules are optional, what I care about is the base rule set, since that is what most people will play with.

To that end, I've taken a look at Trailblazer. Yes, I am aware at the unintentional hilarity of the names of these two systems. I'm currently working on a set of jokes with regards to that, meanwhile my current system that I'm working on will be geared towards a tweak of the 3.5 rules which I will rename Pioneer.

Moving on. Trailblazer sports a 157 page pdf available at most ebook shops like, RPGnow and DrivethruRPG. While I haven't made it through the entire book yet, it seems to be intended as more of an overlay to existing 3.5 content, than a total rewrite. They look directly at the math and the flow of D&D, and that is of interest to me. They state their motivations and use solid math to back up their changes.

Things that have changed:

1. Skills

Both Pathfinder and Trailblazer have consolidated skills, which is good. They've also changed the system so that putting even one point into a skill grants a +3 bonus to that skill. This does remove the messy first level calculations, and even helps slightly with the issue of skills gained from new classes or Int bonuses. Sadly, there are no retroactive skill points in either system, which still bothers the hell out of me, but I'll save that rant for later.

Still, Trailblazer removes class and cross-class skills, and simply makes all skills available to everyone. Fighters as guards with high notice scores? Unthinkable! Also, no more classes with 2 skill points per level, the new minimum is 4.

2. Feats

Both systems adjust feats to their own means, though Trailblazer tries to balance the "weaker" feats to be better. This is hit or miss for both systems. For example, Pathfinder makes Cleave MUCH better than the original (extra hit on successful hit), while Power Attack is much more complicated to have to figure out. Trailblazer is much the same way, but the QC seems a bit higher. They do suggest that you attempt playing the game without the normal create wondrous item feats and such, however, the idea being that the GM should control permanent magic items introduced to the party. Other than that, the changed feats have been made more expansive than before.

3. Multiclassing

Let's face it, multiclassing in 3.5 sucked ass. It was universally broken, either resulting in laughably weak or unbelievably awesome combinations. Want to play a fighter/mage? Be prepared to be completely left behind in the later levels of play unless you only take a handful of levels in the non-mage stuff. It's better now overall in Trailblazer, while Pathfinder seems to ignore the issue entirely. It's a little complex, but in addition to a Base Attack Bonus, each class has a Base Magic Bonus, and what spells you can cast depend on your classes in a level and your overall magic bonus. For example, a character that has at least 9 levels in wizard can cast 9th level magic, so long as the character's total base attack bonus is high enough to meet the minimum level requirement for 19th level magic.

4. Magic

Speaking of, they've changed the way spells are memorized and used in Trailblazer. All magic using classes now cast pretty much the same way, you prepare a bunch of spells, and then as long as you have available castings per day, you can use any spell of the appropriate level (or below). Sorcerers get more spells per day, while wizards get more spells known.

5. Challenges

The Challenge Level system has been completely revamped and reorganized to give better accounts for the proper challenges for players. Most of the 20th level dragons, for example, are revealed as the CL 26 threats that they are. Similarly, character advancement, saves, to-hit bonuses, and so on, have been re-evaluated and adjusted to allow for better play.

6. Combat

Overall, it looks like they made it run a bit smoother, combining some aspects (like aiding allies with attacks of opportunity). You can even (shock) parry incoming attacks with your combat reaction.

7. Rest

Rather than having 6 hours needed for refreshing abilities, characters gain back all "per day" abilities after ten minutes of rest, with the exception of certain spells (any spells with multiple targets or excessively long durations, or xp costs, for example). Characters also gain back a good number of hitpoints, representing that all players tend to get cure light wound wands after 1st level, and thus after a short rest are usually up to full hitpoints as is. Additionally, characters can be healed up more or brought back to more spells per day by spending action points, which work essentially the same way as Saga Edition Force Points with a few modifications.

8. First level hitpoints

Trailblazer, by default, adds constitution scores to starting hitpoints, thus increasing survivability. Additionally, the d4 hit die has been eliminated, increasing overall survivability.

So, on the face of it, Trailblazer manages to give the game general overall improvements, and answers most of my issues with 3.5 as a stock system. It's not perfect, but it's a sight better than Pathfinder. Now, Pathfinder's rule mods are available online for free, but the core rulebook costs $50. Trailblazer's PDF, meanwhile, is right now $5. In the interest of fairness, I believe the Pathfinder PDF is $10, but there you go.

[frigidmagi]

4. Magic

Speaking of, they've changed the way spells are memorized and used in Trailblazer. All magic using classes now cast pretty much the same way, you prepare a bunch of spells, and then as long as you have available castings per day, you can use any spell of the appropriate level (or below). Sorcerers get more spells per day, while wizards get more spells known.

So does that mean they killed the cleric class?

[Hotfoot]

I'm not sure what you mean by killed the cleric class. Clerics and druids still exist. Clerics still get spontaneous casting, meaning they don't need to memorize healing spells (for good and neutral clerics) or their opposites for the bad guys. They also get bonus domain spells, more or less as normal. I just didn't get into that because the differences between Sorcerer and Wizard under this dynamic seemed more relevant.

[Stofsk]

3. Multiclassing

Let's face it, multiclassing in 3.5 sucked ass. It was universally broken, either resulting in laughably weak or unbelievably awesome combinations. Want to play a fighter/mage? Be prepared to be completely left behind in the later levels of play unless you only take a handful of levels in the non-mage stuff.

Why is this a bad thing? Wizards are meant to wield unbelievable amounts of power.

If power is measured by level, then logically a single-class Wizard would be more powerful than a multiclassed Wizard who takes levels in other classes (like your Fighter Mage example).

Multiclassing sucking and multiclassing not being encouraged are two different things. It's obvious that multiclassed characters are giving up specific power for vaguely defined versatility, which might be better from a role-playing perspective.

7. Rest

Rather than having 6 hours needed for refreshing abilities, characters gain back all "per day" abilities after ten minutes of rest, with the exception of certain spells (any spells with multiple targets or excessively long durations, or xp costs, for example). Characters also gain back a good number of hitpoints, representing that all players tend to get cure light wound wands after 1st level, and thus after a short rest are usually up to full hitpoints as is. Additionally, characters can be healed up more or brought back to more spells per day by spending action points, which work essentially the same way as Saga Edition Force Points with a few modifications.

I'm not sure I like the whole "have a 10 minute power nap and now you can reuse most of your per day abilities". Seems to powerful to me, and you just know some munchkin is gonna go try the "Lol I fall asleep for ten minutes so I can cast fireball again" option.

8. First level hitpoints

Trailblazer, by default, adds constitution scores to starting hitpoints, thus increasing survivability. Additionally, the d4 hit die has been eliminated, increasing overall survivability.

Anything that increases first level survivability is a good thing in my opinion.

[Hotfoot]

Why is this a bad thing? Wizards are meant to wield unbelievable amounts of power.

If power is measured by level, then logically a single-class Wizard would be more powerful than a multiclassed Wizard who takes levels in other classes (like your Fighter Mage example).

Multiclassing sucking and multiclassing not being encouraged are two different things. It's obvious that multiclassed characters are giving up specific power for vaguely defined versatility, which might be better from a role-playing perspective.

Look, just because end-game mages are game breaking doesn't mean they should be game breaking. However, at the end of the day, being able to compete means getting your hands on that tasty 9th level magic at some point in your spellcasting career. Multiclassing makes that nigh-impossible. Multi-classing should be about adding versatility, not about cutting a character off at the knees because they want to make a character that doesn't conform to the cookie-cutter outlines. Should a 20th level wizard be a better wizard than a 10 fighter 10 mage? Sure, but not by the absurd amount they are now. If you were to take a pair of characters, a 10th level fighter and a 10th level mage, they would actually have a better shot against a 20th level mage than the single 10 Fighter 10 mage. In fact, the two separate characters could more often than not take out the multiclassed one, and that's not right. Two characters, regardless of their class combination, should be about equivalent to each other, not to characters half their level. As it stands, without ridiculous cheesemongering (one level in barbarian, one level in ranger, one level in rogue, one level in monk, etc.) or middling to overpowered prestige classes, multiclassing in 3.5 is unabashedly WORTHLESS, and it needs changing. Star Wars Saga does it in a pretty good fashion, but they don't have traditional spellcasters. This system works well, and allows for interesting combinations, like Monk 6/Wizard 14.

I'm not sure I like the whole "have a 10 minute power nap and now you can reuse most of your per day abilities". Seems to powerful to me, and you just know some munchkin is gonna go try the "Lol I fall asleep for ten minutes so I can cast fireball again" option.

Fireball and similar spells can only be restored through use of an action point, of which you get limited numbers per level. You'll note that I mentioned that area effect spells are limited in my review, and it's specifically mentioned in the PDF. If anything, mages are limited by this rule, since all other classes get back most of, if not all of their abilities, but mages only get a portion of their spells without expending a barely renewable resource.

As it stands, most groups tend to do this sort of thing anyway. Get through a hard fight, now we set up camp or fall back to town to rest. It's a needless abstraction and something that's attacked on all sides by players anyway.

Anything that increases first level survivability is a good thing in my opinion.

Indeed. I will say that Pathfinder made first level spellcasters a little more useful in that most 0th level spells were castable at-will, but that's a minor point.

[Stofsk]

As far as the 3.5 multiclassing criticism is concerned, can you illuminate some particular specifics? I'm curious is all. I'm prepared to accept what you have to say of course, I just want to dig deeper.

The real reason I don't like the 10 min rest thing is tied to my dislike of resting to restore powers/abilities that have a daily limit anyway. I always thought that mechanic was a bit dodge.

[Hotfoot]

As far as the 3.5 multiclassing criticism is concerned, can you illuminate some particular specifics? I'm curious is all. I'm prepared to accept what you have to say of course, I just want to dig deeper.

The real reason I don't like the 10 min rest thing is tied to my dislike of resting to restore powers/abilities that have a daily limit anyway. I always thought that mechanic was a bit dodge.

Basically, it comes down to that it's never worthwhile to have equivalent levels in two different classes, because you end up sucking in both. But, if you pick up single level bonuses in certain classes, like Barbarian, you can stack up a bunch of awesome first level feats, saving throw bonuses, and first level abilities.

Now, let's say you want to make a Multiclass Wizard/Cleric. In the basic rules, you have basically a level 10 Wizard and a level 10 Cleric. At level 20, when you're fighting CL 20 threats, you cannot keep pace. You can't heal as much as is needed, and you can't do the ranged damage that's needed. Rather than being a level 20 badass that can cast a mix of arcane and divine magic, you're scrub that's utterly worthless in any level 20 fight.

Now, take into account the Mystic Theurge, the standard prestige class solution to this broken mess. Using the Mystic Theurge Prestige Class, by Level 20, the multiclassed Wizard/Cleric can cast at least some 9th level magic (the sweet spot) from either wizard or cleric, but not both. They still have a wide swath of low level magic, but not much high level stuff. However, I have to be honest that by higher levels, the low level stuff just doesn't work very well most of the time.

With Trailblazer, you can make a Wizard/Cleric hybrid that remains useful and versatile, but lacks the focus that a proper wizard or cleric at max level would have. You only get one list of spells, but it's a full list, all the way up to 20, rather than two half-lists that stop at 10. However, you don't get the Wizard bonus spells known from the last ten levels, or the Cleric's domain spells from the last ten levels, you only get the first ten levels of benefits from each, so they lack the focus and specialization that a pure form of either class gives. However, they can still go toe to toe with another 20th level character because they can still use the level of magic that 20th level threats require.

I mean, here's the thing: multiclassing needs to be about giving options through removing the benefits of specialization. If you make a caster have to choose which few 9th level spells they get to prepare, and have them prepare fewer of them, and ultimately cast fewer of them, you're going to get a character with choices and options, but a chance.

This might not be the best example ever, but the bottom line is that in virtually any D20 product, you're better off specializing in your character than in attempting to make them more well rounded, because they penalize you for that.

[Cynical Cat]

To rephrase Hotfoot's point D&D essentially operates on a threshold system. You need certain amounts of AC, base attack bonus, caster levels, skills, etcetera to have them be effective at level X. When multiclassing most things stack, but spellcasting ability doesn't. This makes multiclassing with spellcasting classes difficult because they lack
1) The caster level to break through SR (ever more common at higher levels for game balance reasons)

2) There spells aren't as potent because their caster levels are lower

3) They lack the high level spells that should be the core of the arsenal and are needed to put/stop the hurt on high level encounters.

So they're boned.

As a sidepoint, point 3 is why there is a lot of arguing over psionicists versus arcane casters and balance. After the errata, there are fewer abusable psion power combinations than arcane spells so psions have better game balance for that reason. Mages also get more spells, but psions can save their points and only use the very important high level/scaled up powers instead of having a small number of high level powers and larger number of weaker abilities.

[Hotfoot]

I have to admit, moving the D&D magic system over to a point based alternative would be the best overall option, but few variants seem willing to do that. Of course, in my mind, the entire magic system is broken and needs to be completely revamped, but that's just me.

[Stofsk]

I never liked the magic system in D&D, it always seemed so arbitrarily limiting. You only get x number of spells to cast per day, but this number increases vastly as you level up more and more. We're supposed to believe that it takes an hour to prep for your daily spells, but again it doesn't make sense; it takes the same amount of 'time' at level 1 as it does at level 20, but at level 20 you're dealing with far more complicated spells and more of them to boot.

Traveller 20 psionics or the way the Force is handled in Star Wars (either in the revised or saga edition) seems infinitely more preferable to me than the way D&D does it.

[Hotfoot]

The only time I've seen a D&D style spell level/slot system work well is in a LARP, and that's only because it's easier to remember what slots you have left per level than points and such.

[rhoenix]

The entire magic system in D&D should've been overhauled a long time ago. I wrote a quick and dirty replacement a few years back during AD&D 2e that basically charged a given spell its level in magic points (with a little less or little more depending on materials needed on a per-spell basis), but though it did streamline things a bit, it also felt like using a screwdriver as a hammer.

When I condense things down, and look at things at their base, almost all characters end up with at least some magic. The delineation of character classes is what begins messing with things, making (by necessity) spell lists for cleric, mage, ranger, bard, etc., which while it appears to offer greater variety on the surface, simply complicates things more.

My best idea was to define a point-buy based ability/feat system that would allow any stock character to be made, as well as offering the direct flexibility to essentially offer multi-classing without needing to bother with labels and extra arbitrary rules.

To follow this idea would require feat trees, or ability trees to define proper pre-requisite abilities for each, for both magic and other fun things, like fighting, influencing others (turning undead, rebuking undead, turning elementals, bard's music), or extra capabilities (a rogue's evasion). In this fashion, one would create one's character based on capability rather than levels, and thus classes, prestige classes and all the rest would be rendered vestigial.

[Magnus]

Try the following optional rules for balancing multi-class spell casters:

Each spell-casting class level = Class Level/2 + Character Level/2 (Max. Class Level *2)

A few examples:

1.) Fighter 10/Wizard 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard.
2.) Fighter 18/Sorcerer 2 casts spells as a 4th level sorcerer.
3.) Fighter 7/Thief 7/Wizard 6 casts spells as a 12th level wizard.
4.) Cleric 10/Sorcerer 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard, and casts cleric spells as a 15th level cleric.

[Hotfoot]

Try the following optional rules for balancing multi-class spell casters:

Each spell-casting class level = Class Level/2 + Character Level/2 (Max. Class Level *2)

A few examples:

1.) Fighter 10/Wizard 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard.
2.) Fighter 18/Sorcerer 2 casts spells as a 4th level sorcerer.
3.) Fighter 7/Thief 7/Wizard 6 casts spells as a 12th level wizard.
4.) Cleric 10/Sorcerer 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard, and casts cleric spells as a 15th level cleric.

That's better for fighter/mage combos, but still leaves caster mixes in the lurch. You need to hit 9th level magic to stay competative.

[frigidmagi]

I honestly think for the Ranger and the Paladin the best idea would be to do away with spells and replace them with magical/spell like abilities.

[Stofsk]

It always struck me as weird why the Ranger and Paladin had spell casting abilities. Spell like abilities is understandable, but actual casting? Always sounded lame to me.

[Comrade Tortoise]

Try the following optional rules for balancing multi-class spell casters:

Each spell-casting class level = Class Level/2 + Character Level/2 (Max. Class Level *2)

A few examples:

1.) Fighter 10/Wizard 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard.
2.) Fighter 18/Sorcerer 2 casts spells as a 4th level sorcerer.
3.) Fighter 7/Thief 7/Wizard 6 casts spells as a 12th level wizard.
4.) Cleric 10/Sorcerer 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard, and casts cleric spells as a 15th level cleric.

That's better for fighter/mage combos, but still leaves caster mixes in the lurch. You need to hit 9th level magic to stay competative.

That is the price they pay for specialization. I agree that yes, there need be some additive casterness for multiclass casters. However there also needs to be a considerable cost in terms of their spellcasting abilities, after all... they are not devoting their lives to it anymore, just keeping in practice so to speak.

[Hotfoot]

Try the following optional rules for balancing multi-class spell casters:

Each spell-casting class level = Class Level/2 + Character Level/2 (Max. Class Level *2)

A few examples:

1.) Fighter 10/Wizard 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard.
2.) Fighter 18/Sorcerer 2 casts spells as a 4th level sorcerer.
3.) Fighter 7/Thief 7/Wizard 6 casts spells as a 12th level wizard.
4.) Cleric 10/Sorcerer 10 casts wizard spells as a 15th level wizard, and casts cleric spells as a 15th level cleric.

That's better for fighter/mage combos, but still leaves caster mixes in the lurch. You need to hit 9th level magic to stay competative.

That is the price they pay for specialization. I agree that yes, there need be some additive casterness for multiclass casters. However there also needs to be a considerable cost in terms of their spellcasting abilities, after all... they are not devoting their lives to it anymore, just keeping in practice so to speak.

The price they pay for not specializing is not being able to compete? Balls. That's an excuse to explain away poor balance. The way I see it, multiclassing should make it so you're competitive. The way it's done in Trailblazer still isn't perfect, but it's a damn sight better than any other method I've seen.

The penalty there for being, say, a Cleric/Wizard is that they have to choose which of their precious spell slots get used for Divine spells and which ones get used for Arcane spells. The also don't get the full benefit of the Cleric bonus Domain Spells or the full bonus of the Wizard additional Spells known. Overall, it means they can cast fewer high level spells as a result, but they can still cast them, and on schedule. I think that in itself is enough of a penalty.

A 20th level character should always be a challenge for a 20th level character, not a total joke, and I defy you to show me how a 15th level caster can in any way be a threat to a 20th level caster.

[Cynical Cat]

Don't be melodramatic Hotfoot. By 15th level caster you're well into the levels where you can whip out a save or die spell. He isn't equal, but he's a threat. I agree with the rest of your points.

[Hotfoot]

Don't be melodramatic Hotfoot. By 15th level caster you're well into the levels where you can whip out a save or die spell. He isn't equal, but he's a threat. I agree with the rest of your points.

He's a threat in the same way a pair of 15th level characters are a threat to a 20th level character, only the crazy thing is that a pair of 15th level casters are actually more of a threat than a 20th level caster who is cut off at the knees by not having access to higher level magic.

Melodramatic, perhaps, but the idea that the best or only or preferred way to balance multiclassing is to make it so multiclassing makes you suck is insane. This isn't really directed at you, but if that's the way to do it, then just remove it as an option.

Now, me? I personally long for the day that D&D gives up the whole level concept and just goes for a skill based system myself. Is it ever likely to happen? Probably not, but I can dream.

[Cynical Cat]

Don't be melodramatic Hotfoot. By 15th level caster you're well into the levels where you can whip out a save or die spell. He isn't equal, but he's a threat. I agree with the rest of your points.

He's a threat in the same way a pair of 15th level characters are a threat to a 20th level character, only the crazy thing is that a pair of 15th level casters are actually more of a threat than a 20th level caster who is cut off at the knees by not having access to higher level magic.

No, he isn't. The spells needed to effectively one shot a caster come into play at 6th level, not 9th. While a 20th level caster is superior in every other way to a 15th, in some ways grossly, who wins initiative or who has had a lot of prep time matters more at that level.

[Magnus]

He's a threat in the same way a pair of 15th level characters are a threat to a 20th level character, only the crazy thing is that a pair of 15th level casters are actually more of a threat than a 20th level caster who is cut off at the knees by not having access to higher level magic.

I disagree with your analysis, but talk is cheap. The only way to settle this is by play-testing, a.k.a. spell duel.

[Hotfoot]

He's a threat in the same way a pair of 15th level characters are a threat to a 20th level character, only the crazy thing is that a pair of 15th level casters are actually more of a threat than a 20th level caster who is cut off at the knees by not having access to higher level magic.

I disagree with your analysis, but talk is cheap. The only way to settle this is by play-testing, a.k.a. spell duel.

Fine, I'll end it here: Wish.

[Hotfoot]

Now, just in case that seemed overly dismissive, allow me to paint a picture without using world-ending spells like "Wish".

9th level

Time Stop: 2-5 rounds to buff, uninterrupted.
Shapechange: Become an adult dragon, proceed to destroy.
Wail of the Banshee: Fort Save or die. Delicious.

8th level

Dimensional Lock: Castable during time stop, you don't get to run. Followed by a grapple check in dragon form = RIP
Mind Blank: Good luck preparing for the fight when you can't scry me.


I mean, really, all you need is Shapechange to really fuck with most spellcasters. Even without resorting to an adult dragon form, I'm sure I could find one that absolutely fucks with most spellcasters by itself within the 20 hit dice limit.

Now, please show what spells you would use to avoid total devestation from that combination, keeping in mind that the only benefit you have is 7th level cleric magic on top of the assumed 7th level arcane magic. Or maybe you could show how 10 levels in fighter give you an edge on a dragon. I look forward to seeing the convolution.

[Comrade Tortoise]

Time Stop: 2-5 rounds to buff, uninterrupted.

I have but one spell that works as a total defense. Antimagic field. 6th level spell. You buff yourself during timestop. I cast antimagic field and if you approach me, your buffs are negated, so is your shapechange. (to be fair, you will still be a dragon... but your claw attacks will become little human swipey fists) and the breath weapon is negated. I can then proceed to come up next to you, negating your defenses and stab you in the throat.

If you want to move away... well I have you at an impasse for 150 minutes. At which time I can forcecage your ass.

Also: wizards and clerics at level 15 can cast 8th level spells... with clerical magic I can get nastier