What to ban to make 3.0E and/or 3.5E playable and fair?

[Lago PARANOIA]

All right. So, if I was running a strict 3.0E game in which any first-party WotC material that was published before 3.5E came out, what would I have to impose a blanket ban on to make the game playable until, oh, character level 20? If this is impossible, what's the highest level I can expect the game to go before I start having to ban more than a third of published material?

Similarly, what if I was running a 3.5E game?

[ishy]

Are you talking about things that are overpowered / underpowered. Or things that literally break the game in half?
Like say Monks or Shadow under the Sun (or whatever the proper name for infinite shadows was)?

[Rawbeard]

Remove either spellcasters, or non-spellcasters, I'd guess.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Things that are grotesquely under/overpowered to the point where a DM can't even maintain the illusion of balance without going hog-wild on material ban and/or intruding in the game too obviously.

For example, while an 11th level melee cleric is clearly superior to a 11th level melee fighter, you can mask this difference by giving the fighter an artifact sword with some bennies on it and some 3.0E wings of flying. By level 17, this is impossible without giving the fighter so much lopsided swag that it breaks peoples' WSoD.

[Schleiermacher]

The big problem here is that generally, 3.0 had saner spellcasters, and didn't have the explosion of spells that compounded the balance problems in 3.5, but I can't think of a single nonspellcasting class that was well-designed in 3.0.

Edit: There was the Rogue, of course. And Paladins and Rangers technically cast spells, but were still useless. Make that martial class.

[Rawbeard]

I think the Barbarian was ok-ish.

[RobbyPants]

If you're looking just to ban stuff, then you still have the issue of most non-casters not being able to keep up with equal CRed opponents as they raise in level. So, from a ban-only standpoint, you're either going to have to ban non-casters, or put a level cap on the game well under 20th level.

[Lago PARANOIA]

The big problem here is that generally, 3.0 had saner spellcasters, and didn't have the explosion of spells that compounded the balance problems in 3.5, but I can't think of a single nonspellcasting class that was well-designed in 3.0.

That's fine. Just, assuming that every 1st-party WotC book was available for the group unless explicitly banned (or if it's just one thing, banning that one scrap of material) and you were willing to lightly baby PCs by doing things like giving out artifact swords, what's the maximum level you could get to without having to:

A.) Ban more than a third of the books.
B.) Accepting a gap in playability/balance larger than, oh, a 9th-level DMG NPC rogue and monk.
C.) Breaking peoples' WSoD by handing out too much swag or unique benefits. If you have to go past tiger amulet level, that's too much.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

You aren't starting from a balanced game foundation to begin with. Banning this or banning that has only a marginal effect on gameplay. The overridin imbalance asserts itself every time. I'll be honest with you that as a player it's annoying to read through or ensure one DM's arbitrary ban list, so often it ends up eliminating fun builds that aren't imbalances along with it.
I really suggest that you just have a talk wIth your players, set your expectations and then go from there. See my campaign sig for details ESP. The gentleman's agreement page.

[Mistborn]

Only allow the Archivist, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, Dread Necromancer, Psion, Sorcerer, and Wizard classes. These classes all handle standard encounters pretty well and stay on roughly the same level barring stuff like extreme DMM cheese or Incnatrixes.

[Wrathzog]

Personally, I'd start with Banning Fighters, Monks, Wizards, Clerics, and Druids. Lemme break out the wikipedia...
Knight, Samurai, Swashbuckler, Artificer, Soulknife, Healer, Shadowcaster, and Truenamer.

Yep.
-e-
In this hypothetical situation, what's the word on nerfing encounters/creatures to allow for the lower end of the party to feel useful?

[virgil]

Or start banning competent CR monsters. I've run a long-term Iron Heroes campaign using stuff from the Monster Manual, all the way up to level 15, for example. They fought stuff at the same CR as other campaigns, but I went out of my way to not use monsters with insta-lose powers or notable numbers of spells or spell-likes.

[Lago PARANOIA]

You aren't starting from a balanced game foundation to begin with. Banning this or banning that has only a marginal effect on gameplay.

Sure, but I've met very few people who claimed that the game couldn't be reasonably balanced with some care at around, oh, level 6. I've met even fewer who claimed that this was the state of affairs at level 2.

If you don't think that the game can be kept at a reasonable balance level up until level 10, then what is your maximum level? And what needs to be done to maintain that?

In this hypothetical situation, what's the word on nerfing encounters/creatures to allow for the lower end of the party to feel useful?

As long as it's not too obvious through tactics (this dragon is only charging people through AoOs with a bite attack! No breath weapons or full attacks or anything) or monster selection (funny how we've only been fighting ropers and screamers since we added those two monks) then pretty much anything goes.

Or start banning competent CR monsters.

Depending on what you mean by 'competent', this might end up being too obvious. Few people are really going to notice if they don't come across any supermonsters like dragons and liches and beholders unless they explicitly seek them out, but they will notice if you restrict the list to 'giant animated wicker men and NPC monks'.

[virgil]

Or start banning competent CR monsters.

Depending on what you mean by 'competent', this might end up being too obvious. Few people are really going to notice if they don't come across any supermonsters like dragons and liches and beholders unless they explicitly seek them out, but they will notice if you restrict the list to 'giant animated wicker men and NPC monks'.

If tiger amulets and less are acceptable means of boosting the under-powered PCs, then the kiddie pool doesn't need to be that shallow. The SGT essentially allows for a 20% margin of error, and as you state, players aren't going to notice the lack of aboleths and liches in their encounters. I mean, tiger monks and warriors of Greyskull should be able to handle Maruts, Frost Giant Jarls, and Mummy Lords. On top of that, you can make original monsters through re-skinning; like a rakshasa with fighter levels going by the name of Koschei, or a colossal centipede with creature type changed to dragon (give it dragon fear too) and described as a linnorm.

[squirrelloid]

Only allow the Archivist, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, Dread Necromancer, Psion, Sorcerer, and Wizard classes. These classes all handle standard encounters pretty well and stay on roughly the same level barring stuff like extreme DMM cheese or Incnatrixes.

Um, what? 3.0? (Archivist doesn't even exist, nor does Beguiler. Doubt Dread Necromancer).

[...You Lost Me]

Only allow the Archivist, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, Dread Necromancer, Psion, Sorcerer, and Wizard classes. These classes all handle standard encounters pretty well and stay on roughly the same level barring stuff like extreme DMM cheese or Incnatrixes.

Um, what? 3.0? (Archivist doesn't even exist, nor does Beguiler. Doubt Dread Necromancer).

Archivist, Dread Necromancer - Heroes of Horror
Beguiler - PHB II

Of course putting the archivist in a class with a cleric and putting a wizard with a sorcerer makes no damn sense, but those classes definitely exist

EDIT: Ah, I'm a fool. You're right, the archivist, dread necro, beguiler, and psion(since 3.0 psionics is terribad) should be removes.

[RobbyPants]

Only allow the Archivist, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, Dread Necromancer, Psion, Sorcerer, and Wizard classes. These classes all handle standard encounters pretty well and stay on roughly the same level barring stuff like extreme DMM cheese or Incnatrixes.

Um, what? 3.0? (Archivist doesn't even exist, nor does Beguiler. Doubt Dread Necromancer).

Similarly, what if I was running a 3.5E game?

[squirrelloid]

A major factor here is going to be player optimization capabilities.

-Keep in mind 3.0 tripping is more awesome than 3.5 tripping. This makes fighters more useful.

-There is no golemstrike or (whatever its called that lets rogues SA undead), iirc. This makes rogues quite a bit weaker.

-TWF doesn't work with Unarmed Attacks. (3.0 UAs are specifically a general set of attacks using any body part. You can't 'use your other fist' to gain extra attacks. The fact that you have 2 fists, 2 elbows, 2 knees, 2 feet, a head, and so on are already incorporated into your UA).

-Getting bonuses to spell DC is a lot easier, including (iirc) the basic feats being +2/+4 instead of +1/+2.

-There is no DMM.

Okay, my 3.0 collection includes all 5 class splats, Forgotten Realms campaign setting, Psionics Handbook, and Oriental Adventures. I can't be bothered to remember how 3.0 Psionics worked, because it was crazy, so let's ignore that one. I think I also have the 3.0 PGtF somewhere, but hell if i can remember where it is.

Obvious Bans
-Polymorph (all of them, spells, PHB)
-Wildshape (still based on polymorph in 3.0, Druids are more than fine without it). Possibly consider just banning druid altogether. (The problem with druid is it goes to crazytown with only core, and a lot sooner than clerics and wizarsd)
-Blacklight (spell, FR)
-Archmage (PrC, FR)
-Red Wizard (PrC, FR)
-Shadow Adept (PrC, FR)
-Contemplative (PrC, DotF)
Ug, too much work to go through all these. I haven't looked at MotW or TaB yet. There's probably stuff I'm glancing over too.

Other:
-Do something about planar binding for wishes?
-Allow Circle Kick (S+F, feat) to work whenever a BAB UA attack is made, not require a special full-attack action of its own. (This should keep Monks more relevant).
-Encourage OA classes. The OA samurai is playable, and there is good stuff for OA monks. The OA Wu Jen is far more distinctive than the later CM Wu Jen. (The Shugenja is still pretty boring).
-Optimizing iaijutsu can give pretty good damage output, although this ends up with either finding a way to resheath as a free action, or drawing a pile of weapons as free actions (quickdraw) and dropping them on the ground.
-Encourage PC clerics to use party buff spells. This'll help mask how much more they're contributing to the party by making the fighters and the like more competitive.

[Juton]

I think back on Brilliant Gameologists we reached the conclusion that the core PHB was by far the most imbalanced, if you removed that, what was left was a lot more balanced. You'd have to leave some spells and feats that aren't replicated elsewhere of course. But you can lose a lot of it, replace it from spells from elsewhere and have a perfectly functional game.

If you where going for something more conventional I'd say ban all non casters (anything less than a bard). At higher levels monster HPs, ACs and damage doesn't exist in the same realm as most melee characters stats. It would take a lot of house rules to either fix all the monster stats or bring melee classes into line with them.

[squirrelloid]

I think back on Brilliant Gameologists we reached the conclusion that the 3 core books where by far the most imbalanced, if you removed all three what was left was a lot more balanced. You'd have to leave some spells and feats that aren't replicated elsewhere of course.

If you where going for something more conventional I'd say ban all non casters (anything less than a bard). At higher levels monster HPs, ACs and damage doesn't exist in the same realm as most melee characters stats. It would take a lot of house rules to either fix all the monster stats or bring melee classes into line with them.

I participated in a 3.x no-full-casters game (nothing better than Bard, and even full bard wasn't allowed, but you could multi-class it at some rate), and with sufficient optimization and letting players choose their own gear with WBL, PCs could keep up and dominate monsters of above their CR. Rampant multiclassing was rampant. Someone found a way to get wildshape without spellcasting (this was when it was still based on polymorph, iirc). I optimized the hell out of Iaijutsu. Game got to level 15, and we were consistently battling over EL+4 well before the end.

(I mean, certain things just weren't used by the DMs by agreement, but Blasphemy-spamming Balors are an automatic TPK before epic levels unless a wizard has the right contingency, so that's not even a non-caster problem).

Overwhelming offense + good stealth and reconnaisance abilities + creative players is pretty brutal. Requires high levels of optimization.

[Wrathzog]

At higher levels monster HPs, ACs and damage don't actually matter.

Hold on... okay, I got it.

Your avatar is perfect.

[squirrelloid]

Some more thoughts:
-technically UA should work with a weapon, even a 2h one, as TWF. Ie, you can swing your sword and kick them at the same time. I don't remember if there's a sage ruling or what the specific RAW would look like.

-Non-casters have three real options for contributing to combat.
(a) Grapple (options suck)
(b) Trip (options are pretty good, eg, Knock Down feat)
(c) Massive damage. (options: Iaijutsu or SA, each hit becomes an SoD vs. massive damage)

[erik]

Ban everything but cleric. Give clerics spell access to wizard, druid and cleric lists and deities have nothing to do with your casting. Give clerics 6 skill pts/level and make everything a class skill.

Get rid of polymorph spells.

Instead of Turn Undead offer a few class packages at intro.
* Familiar
* Animal Companion
* Full Martial Weapons +Weapon Focus/Spec with 1 weapon
* Turn Undead
* Monk Unarmed Combat/Speed
* Rage (doesn't interfere with casting)
* Bardic Music

Could flesh out the packages a bit even make em a bit more important and thematic.

I don't really care about BAB, I suppose it could go to +1/level.

[CCarter]

Ban everything but cleric. Give clerics spell access to wizard, druid and cleric lists and deities have nothing to do with your casting. Give clerics 6 skill pts/level and make everything a class skill.

Get rid of polymorph spells.

Instead of Turn Undead offer a few class packages at intro.
* Familiar
* Animal Companion
* Full Martial Weapons +Weapon Focus/Spec with 1 weapon
* Turn Undead
* Monk Unarmed Combat/Speed
* Rage (doesn't interfere with casting)
* Bardic Music

Could flesh out the packages a bit even make em a bit more important and thematic.

I don't really care about BAB, I suppose it could go to +1/level.

You could probably do that with less jiggering with the UA gestalt rules. Have everyone be a cleric/? (so one side of the gestalt is set to cleric, pick whatever down the other side).

[Foxwarrior]

Isn't Sorcerer a better choice for the only class? Cleric doesn't allow for much customization, because all the Clerics know every spell, and there aren't all that many really good feat builds to choose from for them either. It would be much easier to make a diverse party of five Sorcerers than a diverse party of five Clerics, and party diversity is still a thing that is nice.