Help with a banlist

[Master Thrower]

Hey guys im starting new campaign soon, and was looking for some advice on a list to help shore up some of the more broken things in the game,

This banlist isn't set in stone in terms of whats allowed and whats not allowed, most things if a character wants can be brought up on a case by case basis.

Now i'd like to know if i've missed or maybe have banned/changed unfairly

Any input would be helpful thanks.

Books Allowed-

Core

PHB 2 (Classes+feats, spells upon review/request)

Heroes of Horror

Completes- warrior, adventurer, divine, arcane, mage

Miniatures Handbook

ToB

Lords of Madness

Planar handbook

Upon Request-
Location books (Sandstorm, Stormwrack, Frostburn)
Races of X books
any other 1st party material (those not listed I am less familiar with, but am still willing to review)

Unearthed Arcana Material-
traits
flaws
variant classes
racial paragons
level adjustment buy off


Classes/Prestige class allowed but not in a legal book -
Wildshape ranger (unearthed arcana)
Factotum (Dungeonscape)
Dungeon crasher fighter (Dungeonscape)
Zhentarim Fighters- 3/5/9 level gain abilities (Skill focus intimidate, intimidate lasts 24 hours, Swift Action intimidate)
Lion spirit totem barbarian class feature (complete champion)
Fist of the Forest (Complete Champion)
Blackblood Cultist (Champions of Ruin)
Iajutsu Master (Oriental Adventures)
Swiftblades (online web enhancement)
Hellfire warlock (online web enhancement)

Banned-

Classes/Prestige Classes-
Tained Scholar
Focused Specialist
Domain WIzard


Feats-
Lightning Maces (for non maces)
Draconic Rites for Kobolds
mindsight
reserve feats

Spell-
Solid Fog line
Celerity line
Free wishes
gate (creature is not automatically controlled)
simulacrum
ice assassin

Items-
Candle of Invocation
Dust of Sneezing and Choaking

Altered-

Classes-
Monk (Need neutral or lawful in alignment, full BAB flurry, flurry as standard action)
Barbarian (no alignment restriction)
Bard (no alignment restriction)
Hexblade (no alignment restriction)
Warlock ((no alignment restriction)
Ranger (full animal companion)
Druid (aspect of nature variant, in Hours/Level
Rouges (lose trap sense, deal half sneak attack to normally immune creatures (minus oozes, swarms, incorporeal undead)

No multiclass penalties.

Prestige Classes-
Initiate of the Sevenfold veil (Anti magic field penetrates veils, must an be abjurer)
Ruby Knight Vindicator (one extra swift action per round)

Feats-
Arcane thesis (Can’t reduce below 1)
(same applies to all metamagic reduction)
Toughness (improved toughness)
Can take sudden metamagics up to twice per feat
Weapon Focus (+1/4 levels minimum 1)
Dodge (+1 AC)
Divine Metamagic (Night rods cannot be stacked to count towards turn attempts i:e 1 limit)

[Flickerdart]

Check out the banlist used by the Test of Spite . They know what's what.

[Answerer]

Test of Spite's banlist was easily the most thorough and well-documented banlist ever made for 3.5; it may help with yours.

[ericgrau]

For practical purposes I think it's best to look over things on a case-by-case basis or your list will be a mile long and you won't use 95% of it. Often players know to avoid certain things so it's unnecessary.

You might still make a banlist of a handful of the biggest or most common offenders though.

[Callista]

Yeah, I second that. Just say: "I have to approve anything non-Core," and then you get to check things over before they start. You need to know what the PCs are capable of, so you can figure out how best to challenge them without killing them.

I also suggest a houserule that allows them to rebuild their characters without penalty if they turn out to be too strong or too weak or make use of unrealistic or overpowered rules loopholes. There's no reason to penalize anybody for figuring out how to make a powerful character, but if the character outshines everybody else, he's got to be rebuilt so that the other PCs don't end up useless.

No reason to be too lawyerly about it if you have reasonable people in your game. You can never make rules that cover absolutely every possibility anyway.

[Emperor Tippy]

Test of Spite's banlist was easily the most thorough and well-documented banlist ever made for 3.5; it may help with yours.

It's also one of the worst banlists around. Half of whats on that list shouldn't be, half of what should be on the list isn't.

The only good thing about that list is that it's actually publicly available.

To the OP: Before you can create a banlist (or get good advice on one) you need to decide what power level you want the game to be.

Some games should see most of core banned, others should simply see a few spells and abilities tweaked.

[Alienist]

Frostburn is awful, you're better off just banning the whole book and denying its existence.

[Answerer]

Yeah, I second that. Just say: "I have to approve anything non-Core,"

Too bad the overwhelming majority of broken crap is in Core, huh?

It's also one of the worst banlists around. Half of whats on that list shouldn't be, half of what should be on the list isn't.

The only good thing about that list is that it's actually publicly available.

Funny, I'd consider things like "documented test cases for everything banned" and "widely and publicly used and documented" to be very strong elements in its favor. The fact that everything on the list has been used to break the game or the Test of Spite is a very strong indication that they should be there.

As for things that should be on there and aren't, ToS had very high power level expectations in general. It's a starting point to remove some of the most broken stuff, but it won't be sufficient for most games that aren't also high-op arenas.

[Essence_of_War]

What's your goal with this banlist? Is it to limit the cheddar level from your players? Is it to cut material that you personally don't like? Some other reason?

In my experience, lots of problems that people want to solve w/ a banlist, can be solved better by conversation w/ the players about the group's collective expectations for the power/optimization level of the game.

Sidenote: I am puzzled as to why the wizard is allowed, the focused specialist is banned, the domain wizard is banned, but the Elf Generalist ACF is not.

Also, I might flesh out the metamagic thing a little more. Is the whole spell a minimum of +1, is each non +0 metamagic a minimum of +1...

Edit: Is there something about reserve feats that I'm missing? I've never thought any of them were gamebreaking. Minor Shapeshift is pretty good, sure, but hardly gamebreaking...

[Jandrem]

Why would you ban Reserve Feats? Do you want all your spellcasters resorting to crossbows and daggers?

[Master Thrower]

What's your goal with this banlist? Is it to limit the cheddar level from your players? Is it to cut material that you personally don't like? Some other reason?

In my experience, lots of problems that people want to solve w/ a banlist, can be solved better by conversation w/ the players about the group's collective expectations for the power/optimization level of the game.

Sidenote: I am puzzled as to why the wizard is allowed, the focused specialist is banned, the domain wizard is banned, but the Elf Generalist ACF is not.

Also, I might flesh out the metamagic thing a little more. Is the whole spell a minimum of +1, is each non +0 metamagic a minimum of +1...

Edit: Is there something about reserve feats that I'm missing? I've never thought any of them were gamebreaking. Minor Shapeshift is pretty good, sure, but hardly gamebreaking...

The goal is to limit cheddar, Just because i may not like a book isn't grounds for me to ban it.


Players can talk to me about the banlist if they have a build in mind. But I just wanna have a list to start with.

THe metamagic thing I forgot to mention it doesn't effect +0 metamagic feats

reserve feats I added on just so wizards, can (in theory) run out of spells, they may come off the list

The reason eleven generalist isn't on here as Races of the Wild isn't a book im super familiar with (i think thats where it is) but i think i'll add it on as well since im banning domain/focused specalist.

Also on power levels i'm looking to play a more high powered campaign, but cut out some of the worse offenders on gamebreaking stuff.

And just again to reinforce it, this is not a hard banlist, just things i'd prefer my players not use, if they want to use tainted scholar without a way to negate taint effects, they can go for it, but they'd have to ask me first

[CTrees]

My usual suggestion: ban core. Suddenly there's only a few random things which need banning, and much of that is limiting the way things are interpretted.

[Malachei]

IMO, many parts of the Test of Spite's banlist are rooted in personal play preferences.

Why are SLA's game-breaking unless they have somatic components?
Why ban fighter (except for dungeoncrasher) in a normal game?

It is really a mix of banlist and a big bag of houserules.

There are a lot of aspects that would not seem to be game-breaking, but are still houseruled, and this makes the list huge.

And exactly because it is so huge, I think it is a surprise that some game-breakers are not in it (I'm looking at you, shivering touch).

[Roguenewb]

IF you're trying to hole players to tier 3 or lower (JaronK's recommended level of play) or preventing the arrival of tier 0 builds.

If you prefer the first goal, you almost need to rework the available spells from the ground up. There are so many spells that need the banhammer, and unfortunately, many of them are in core. I can't list everything that is needed to limit to tier 3 effective play style, that'd be a huge design project.

If you just want to stop tier 0 shenanigans, the previously recommended Test of Spite list isn't a bad place to start.

[Essence_of_War]

reserve feats I added on just so wizards, can (in theory) run out of spells, they may come off the list

The reason eleven generalist isn't on here as Races of the Wild isn't a book im super familiar with (i think thats where it is) but i think i'll add it on as well since im banning domain/focused specalist.

Also on power levels i'm looking to play a more high powered campaign, but cut out some of the worse offenders on gamebreaking stuff.

So is your problem with focused specialist also that it makes it hard for wizards to run out of spells? On balance, I actually think Focused Specialist is less powerful than an ordinary wizard. It may have more spell slots, but they come at the cost of several schools, none of which are trivial losses, AND the cost of undifferentiated spell slots. I think the Elven Generalist and Domain Wizard are upgrades for wizards, but that the focused specialist is at best a lateral move that trades significant flexibility for extra spell slots from 1 school. Even if that school is conjuration or transmutation, this is a pretty big hit for long term power level.

I don't think reserve feats really bring any cheddar to the table, I'd let people have those. But you might want to add Incantatrix to your PrC banlist as it basically specializes in metamagic reduction. Similarly, the polymorph/shapechange line almost single-handedly push the Transmutation school into one of the most powerful choices. If you think the solid fog type spells are bannable, I would strongly suggest eliminating the polymorph/shapechange line in favor of Trollshape/Dragonshape/Body of War.

You also may want to implement the Hexblade fixes that the designer suggested:

If you want to boost the hexblade, I'd try the following changes:

* Good Fortitude save
* Curse ability usable 1 + the hexblade's Cha modifier per day
* Curse ability usable as a swift action
* Curse ability does not count as used if the target makes his saving throw
* Ability to cast in light or medium armor and while carrying a light shield or buckler
* At 6th level, the hexblade can cast one hexblade spell per day as a swift action, as long as its original casting time is a standard action or faster. He gains an additional use of this power at levels 8, 11, 14, and 18.

The key to the hexblade is his curse ability, but it's a little un-fun to have it so limited in use. The hexblade also has trouble casting spells and using his melee attacks, so shifting spells to swift actions fits in with the idea of an armored mage.

(These are by no means official. They're just off the top of my head changes I'd consider m wrote:

Poor guy doesn't get enough love

[Togo]

I'd avoid the Test of Spite banlist. It's based on a host of assumptions that aren't true in most games, as is the Test itself.

The old Living Greyhawk banlist is over here:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=lg

Under Living greyhawk campaign standards, downloadable in the sidebar. This set is, if anything, too restrictive, but gives you an idea of what other people thought of as problematical.

But banning everything up front is a huge endevour. For the sake of your sanity, I'd suggest producing only a limited list now, and then reviewing characters individually.

[Answerer]

Oh god, Living Greyhawk. I wouldn't touch that ever in a million years. The entire "living X" concept was horribly executed.

[Particle_Man]

I'd ban Divine Metamagic, Persistent Spell and the Candle of Invocation, for starters.

[Callista]

The trouble with banning things, is that it has the effect of just reducing the power level, but doesn't really reduce powergaming. When you're done removing things, there will still be a most-powerful-thing left over, and that will appeal to the powergamers.

If you want to ban things, don't focus on the most powerful things so much as the things that wouldn't be part of a balanced build, whether they're too powerful, too weak, or just plain too weird. And don't bother banning obscure things, or ridiculous things. If you find yourself having to ban Pun-Pun, you probably have a bunch of trolls for players, and I don't mean the green regenerating kind.

Better to just check over your players' builds before you start, and make sure everybody is more or less at the same power level. Then, when you get the spread of power levels worked out, get the skilled optimizers to help the newbies and casual players get their characters up to average party power level.

Oh, and have your players make their characters together. That way you don't end up with redundant skills and totally incompatible (as opposed to "amusingly clashing") personalities.

[sonofzeal]

Some more formatting might help. Adding bold or underline or sizes would certainly help me scan your index much more easily.

Spoiler

Show

Also, spoilers.

[Talakeal]

Just ban Tome of Battle and the Expanded Psionics Handbook. I feel that everything else ever published for third edition is gold, and if you remove these two stinkers it all works out fine.

[Essence_of_War]

Blue text = sarcasm?

[Particle_Man]

The old Living Greyhawk banlist is over here:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=lg

Under Living greyhawk campaign standards, downloadable in the sidebar. This set is, if anything, too restrictive, but gives you an idea of what other people thought of as problematical.

Oh god, Living Greyhawk. I wouldn't touch that ever in a million years. The entire "living X" concept was horribly executed.

*Downloads Living Greyhawk Campaign Standards*

I knew that following Answerer's posts would be useful to my interests.

[nyarlathotep]

I'd avoid the Test of Spite banlist. It's based on a host of assumptions that aren't true in most games, as is the Test itself.

The old Living Greyhawk banlist is over here:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=lg

Under Living greyhawk campaign standards, downloadable in the sidebar. This set is, if anything, too restrictive, but gives you an idea of what other people thought of as problematical.

But banning everything up front is a huge endevour. For the sake of your sanity, I'd suggest producing only a limited list now, and then reviewing characters individually.

Wow that ban list is the opposite of intelligent and thoughtful.

[Gurgeh]

A lot of the bans there are for flavour rather than balance, and unfortunately there's no way of telling which was which without researching each banned spell/feat/class/whatever individually.

[Emperor Tippy]

The LG banlist is idiotic. It bans plenty of things that are just fine and allows plenty of things that are incredibly broken.

[killianh]

A good thing to do for a ban list would be to look at some of the more broken tricks that have been posted on this forum and ban common elements between them.

Personally my ban list (other than simple vetoing cheese builds) when needed (I usually run higher power games) is pretty simple:
No ebberon,
No Forgotten realms
No psionics
No oriental
No Magazines
3.0 on request and review

outside of that don't be afraid to do on the spot bans if the players come up with something that ends up breaking the game or puts their characters leaps and bounds above the other players in your group. Just give them a forewarning that that may happen if they try to break their characters (I will never allow Ice assassin or Genesis in my games), unless everyone optimizes to roughly the same level, then just up the difficulty and lower the exp they end up getting.

[Suddo]

Not so much a ban but a note you should kind of tell your players. Either ban or do cryptic answers to anything that is Augury-ed. This help bring several things in a more workable condition.
Spontaneous Divination (Complete Champions) might want to be looked at.
It should be noted that the Generic Caster from UA is interesting as picking Arcane or Divine doesn't limit your spell selection mearly (huh Mozilla disagrees with that word) what scrolls you can use and such.
Why do rogues lose Trap Sense? That seems silly.
I assume Ur-Priest is considered Roleplay only type of a class, or do you actually tell your player their evil actions will cause the village folks to try and slaughter them (and by village folk I mean that order of wizards in town).
Leadership and all its forms should be banned.
White Raven Tactics should be looked at.
Diplomacy isn't RAW, its instead more RP helper.
Don't know if its in your list of allowed books but Thought Bottles.
I like Magical Item Compendium and Psionics. I assume you have your reasons but I'm just sayin'.


This is my ban these, I personally have a pile of books I'm 100% fine with and everything else I just say to ask me first.
I'd say ban Illithid Servants and Planar Shepherds but I don't think you are allow those books. Oh and Initiate of Mystra. Check Artificers. They may or may not fit in a high power game depending on how everything goes.
Put some limit on DCFS, there is a thread about it right now with several ideas, or outright ban it.

[Greyfeld85]

A good thing to do for a ban list would be to look at some of the more broken tricks that have been posted on this forum and ban common elements between them.

Personally my ban list (other than simple vetoing cheese builds) when needed (I usually run higher power games) is pretty simple:
No ebberon,
No Forgotten realms
No psionics
No oriental
No Magazines
3.0 on request and review

outside of that don't be afraid to do on the spot bans if the players come up with something that ends up breaking the game or puts their characters leaps and bounds above the other players in your group. Just give them a forewarning that that may happen if they try to break their characters (I will never allow Ice assassin or Genesis in my games), unless everyone optimizes to roughly the same level, then just up the difficulty and lower the exp they end up getting.

Yes, banning huge swaths of resource materials is definitely the best way to approach it.

I'm seriously glad I don't play in your games. Not being able to play a Warforged, a Soulbow, a Clawlock... simply because you CBF to check over your players' character sheets.