Balancing Casters by Buffing Martials

[Nifft]

I think there are several reasons why IRL experience so often does not match with forum expectations.

1 - People are generally bad at optimizing.

2 - People disproportionately play lower level games.

3 - People who are better at optimizing are disproportionately stuck being the DM, because a necessary aspect of being a good optimizer is having a solid grasp of the rules.


The trouble is, none of those are stable reasons. The fact that people are bad at optimizing doesn't prevent someone from randomly stumbling into Incantatrix + Persist, and once someone does that, that game goes boom.

The forum's expectations about class performance can be seen as a worst-case scenario. It's not the average case, which is why it doesn't match the average IRL game -- but you don't put safety features on your bandsaw because someone loses one finger per day, you put the safety features to prevent something which ought to be rather unusual in the first place.


tl;dr - The game is as imbalanced as people claim, but it's not usually relevant because people usually play low-level games with badly made characters vs. badly run opposition, so it usually all evens out. The imbalance should be addressed anyway because if you don't, you're playing golf on a mine-field. Most of the time you'll be fine, but that one time when you're not fine is highly relevant even if it's not common.

[theblasblas]

...You just have to play your role and stop being worried about being a badass demi-god juggernaut...

What happens when you don't have a role anymore? What happens when a stealth mission comes up and instead of looking towards the Rogue, the party looks towards the Wizard because his spells provide much greater options for stealth and utility? What if, by the time a Fighter can charge and defeat a single foe, the Wizard has already left the rest a charred mess with some fireballs? When before the Barbarian can act as a meatshield the dragon is already lying immobile on the ground with 0 Dex? There eventually reaches a point of imbalance where whatever the mundane character does stops mattering.

[ryu]

I also find the idea of a single stealth character in a party rather useless. It forces two bad options. Either your party is with you in case of detection but your stealth is as bad as the weak link stealth wise, stealth almost certainly useless outside of very strange parties, or your party isn't with you to improve your odds of stealthing. I shouldn't have to explain why that's a stupid idea designed to get a character killed.

This is why magic stealth is better. It doesn't force this situation.

[upho]

One is tempted to speculate that this conflation is intentional, but that speculation is pointlessly conspiratorial, and should instead be replaced by an attempt to produce alternative language that refers precisely to "characters with non-broken abilities non-casters can't duplicate". Then we can stop trying to pretend that Chain Binding is a reason that evard's black tentacles needs to be worse.

Yes indeed. Eh... "NBC" ("non-broken caster") for short?

Of course, that acronym might be mistaken for referring to some kind of scrying service...

I dunno, that's all just combat stuff.

Martial PCs need help with everything else except combat.

That's far from the truth IME. Uberchargers, Tripstars etc typically suck in higher level combat intended to challenge their caster allies. But yes, non-casters need even more help outside of combat.

tl;dr - The game is as imbalanced as people claim, but it's not usually relevant because people usually play low-level games with badly made characters vs. badly run opposition, so it usually all evens out. The imbalance should be addressed anyway because if you don't, you're playing golf on a mine-field. Most of the time you'll be fine, but that one time when you're not fine is highly relevant even if it's not common.

This. Bit weird it always has to be repeated though, as one really should be able to assume this to be general knowledge by now.

[Nifft]

That's far from the truth IME. Uberchargers, Tripstars etc typically suck in higher level combat intended to challenge their caster allies. But yes, non-casters need even more help outside of combat.

You're surely right regarding mid-to-high op games, but the premise of my assertion was that the DM ran naive challenges, and the players made beginner mistakes -- so the casters might be a blaster-Wizard and a bear-Druid, for whom T3 challenges are par.

Either way, I think it's true that martial PCs need more non-combat help than they need combat help -- that seems valid, even if they do also need some combat help.

This. Bit weird it always has to be repeated though, as one really should be able to assume this to be general knowledge by now.

Well, it's the sort of people who wander in and tell us that they've been playing the game for 10 years now, and it didn't feel broken, so how can we say it's broken?

Basically, the people who make the argument today weren't here when the same argument was raised last month.

So, we tell them the answer, and we expect a new poster next month.

[skunk3]

It's not that myself or most other people don't see any imbalance. That's not the issue. The issue is that in most games the imbalance never matters.

IF a game is going to be high OP and IF the game is expected to run to 20th level or even beyond, then yeah, we can talk about homebrew fixes to make martials/mundanes a bit more useful... a wider array of class skills, perhaps more skill points per level, feat re-works, amendments to feat chains and prerequisites, amendments to prestige class requirements, a buff to saving throw progressions, etc. That's all well and good. However, as I said, that's only really needed in certain circumstances... but how many people, when planning a character for a high OP / high level game go with extremely lackluster choices unless they are ignorant? Anyone wanting to fill the role of a fighter could easily just be a cleric and be a better fighter than a fighter, and most people know this.


As far as mundanes being outshone to the point of being virtually useless, how often does that REALLY happen in practice? Rogues have UMD... it's not like Wizards are going to be stealthier than rogues the vast majority of the time. Yeah, a barbarian might not need to be a meat shield anymore for big baddies but they can still fill a role by mopping up mooks and pestering more challenging enemies and allowing spellcasters to conserve spells. I feel that a lot of the concerns expressed here are overblown to a certain degree. All classes have a role to play and while some become less effective at higher levels, it can still be a fun experience regardless even if that means riding the bench sometimes.

[death390]

the only current fix for out of combat is currently skills in the case of mundane characters. that being said there is not much that can be done about that, other than give everyone more skill points, this is part of why i like the pathfinder approach to skills but find that there are still not enough for the classes. a rouge gets 8-10+ int in a list of 36 skills... these are out skill monkeys and they still barely have enough to cover their bases. it is worse in 3.5 where there are about 45 skills and its 2:1 ratio for cross class. even then in 3.5 no one can find traps without trapfinding, nor can they track without the feat (which is a huge investment).

hell double every classes base amount (rouge gets 16+int) with a minimum of 6+int. so that skills actually get more use. it is honestly a cop out how little skills everyone gets. several of the skills should just be 1 rank per level because they are so important (perception, 1 profession, diplomacy) but that would make everyone equal and some people are not as good as others so the choice should be there to put less ranks in a skill. this doesn't even touch the mult-skill categories: craft, profession, speak language. these categories themselves could take a large chuck of the points.

i mean honestly how many people have made backstories where they are a guard/ farmer/ street thief and actually used some of their precious points in profession? i don't because there arn't enough to keep up with what is minimally needed.

[heavyfuel]

How's this:

We take the Automatic Bonus Progression from Pathfinder and make it not tied to Character Level, but to "Tier Level"

Tier Level works much like Initiator Level does. All Tier 5 & 6 classes add their full level, Tier 4 classes add 3/4 their level, Tier 3 classes add 1/2 their level, Tier 1 and 2 classes don't add any level.

eg.: Nale from OOTS, a Fighter 2/Rogue 3/Sorcerer 8, would have the automatic bonus progression of a Lv 4 character (Resistance +1, Armor and Weapon attunement +1). Meanwhile, a straight Bard 13 would have the bonus of a lv 6 character (Resistance and Deflection +1, Armor and Weapon attunement +1, Mental and Physical Prowess +2)

Doesn't fix the problems, but it does help out lower tier classes.

[EldritchWeaver]

How's this:

We take the Automatic Bonus Progression from Pathfinder and make it not tied to Character Level, but to "Tier Level"

Tier Level works much like Initiator Level does. All Tier 5 & 6 classes add their full level, Tier 4 classes add 3/4 their level, Tier 3 classes add 1/2 their level, Tier 1 and 2 classes don't add any level.

eg.: Nale from OOTS, a Fighter 2/Rogue 3/Sorcerer 8, would have the automatic bonus progression of a Lv 4 character (Resistance +1, Armor and Weapon attunement +1). Meanwhile, a straight Bard 13 would have the bonus of a lv 6 character (Resistance and Deflection +1, Armor and Weapon attunement +1, Mental and Physical Prowess +2)

Doesn't fix the problems, but it does help out lower tier classes.

What exactly is this supposed to fix? Also note, that the ABP assumes that you get a full equivalent to the normal stuff you can buy (actually, the implementation has some problems like having lower bonuses compared to real PCs with some specialization in their equipment). Which means that anyone who gets lower than full bonus simply ignores it and simply buys the normal stuff. Or maybe that even full ABP classes buy something which has a higher bonus. Unless you say that the ABP rules import also includes the removal of all items which improve ABP bonus like-bonuses.

[heavyfuel]

What exactly is this supposed to fix? [...] Unless you say that the ABP rules import also includes the removal of all items which improve ABP bonus like-bonuses.

It's supposed to let lower tier classes have more diverse magical items and not have to focus so much in +X bonus. Gaining more utility instead of simply better numbers

That second part might be interesting

[Bakkan]

With regard to the question of "what abilities should we give non-spellcasters in order to increase their capability", I would like to see a lot more ability for non-spellcasters to shape the battlefield, before and during a battle, as well as some ways to affect when and where combat occurs. As it is, spellcasters have many options for this, including divinations, battefield control spells, teleport effects, and so on. Some ideas I have for non-spellcaster abilities are below. I tried to come up with abilities that would be important and useful while still feeling very "physical", which might differentiate them from spellcasters, whose abilities often seem ephemeral. The numbers I have below are simply my first thoughts.

Constructor: In one hour, you construct fortifications out of the natural resources around you. For instance, if you are in a forest, you may make them out of wood, and you may use stone almost anywhere. You may mix materials you have access to. The fortifications may take any shape you desire, such as a wall, keep, or castle, with a total volume not to exceed ten 10-ft cubes per point of BAB. You decide all details of its construction, including whether it has crenellations, its type of doors or windows, and any secret passages. You may include decorations such as carvings or sculptures, but these may require a Craft check.

Earthshaker: As a standard action, you may strike the ground below you with a limb or weapon, causing reverberations in the earth. This vibration causes a 20 foot tall, 5-ft diameter column of earth and stone to erupt out of the ground at a point you designate within 5ft/level of your location. This column has been shifted up from the ground below, and is thus there permanently. Any creature standing over the column may make a Reflex save (DC 10 + your BAB) to avoid it. On a success, the creature moves to a random adjacent square. On a failure, the creature is launched upward by the column. If there is a ceiling at most 20 feet above the floor where the column erupts, a creature who fails its save takes 1d6 bludgeoning damage/point of BAB you have (minimum 1d6, maximum 10d6) and then falls into a random square adjacent to the column. If there is not a ceiling within 20 ft of the floor, the creature falls in a random square within 10 ft of the column and takes 3d6 falling damage.

Fleet of Foot: You have been adopted by the wind spirits and may when needed move at their speed. When you use this ability you may move up to 100 miles per round. You may move with this increased speed for a total number of rounds per day equal to your BAB. You may only travel to places you would normally be able to go simply using movement modes for which you have a listed speed; for instance, if you cannot fly, cannot walk on water, and do not have a swim speed, you may not cross a body of water without taking a bridge. You also may not unlock doors, though you may pass through unlocked ones. You may take one additional creature with you per 3 points of BAB; for this purpose, Large creatures count as 2 creatures, Huge creatures count as 4, and so forth.

Feel the Ether: You can feel the subtle vibrations in reality caused by creatures teleporting. Whenever a creature teleports into your threatened area, you may take an Attack of Opportunity against it. Whenever a creature teleports to within 5 ft/BAB of you, you immediately know where the teleporting creature(s) will arrive, and may take an immediate action to move up to your speed.

[zlefin]

In terms of general inspiration; looking to related systems is handy.
Legend was designed in part to address these kinds of issues iirc; not sure whatever happened with it, haven't heard about it in years.

One thing I do remember is that the skill scaling was different: effects similar to 3.5's Epic Skill uses came online much much earlier. sadly you can' directly import something like that into 3.5 cuz there's so many ways in 3.5 to boost a skill by a lot.

maybe someone else cna remember some other notes from it that'd be helpful.

[Goaty14]

Spoiler

Show

With regard to the question of "what abilities should we give non-spellcasters in order to increase their capability", I would like to see a lot more ability for non-spellcasters to shape the battlefield, before and during a battle, as well as some ways to affect when and where combat occurs. As it is, spellcasters have many options for this, including divinations, battefield control spells, teleport effects, and so on. Some ideas I have for non-spellcaster abilities are below. I tried to come up with abilities that would be important and useful while still feeling very "physical", which might differentiate them from spellcasters, whose abilities often seem ephemeral. The numbers I have below are simply my first thoughts.

Constructor: In one hour, you construct fortifications out of the natural resources around you. For instance, if you are in a forest, you may make them out of wood, and you may use stone almost anywhere. You may mix materials you have access to. The fortifications may take any shape you desire, such as a wall, keep, or castle, with a total volume not to exceed ten 10-ft cubes per point of BAB. You decide all details of its construction, including whether it has crenellations, its type of doors or windows, and any secret passages. You may include decorations such as carvings or sculptures, but these may require a Craft check.

Earthshaker: As a standard action, you may strike the ground below you with a limb or weapon, causing reverberations in the earth. This vibration causes a 20 foot tall, 5-ft diameter column of earth and stone to erupt out of the ground at a point you designate within 5ft/level of your location. This column has been shifted up from the ground below, and is thus there permanently. Any creature standing over the column may make a Reflex save (DC 10 + your BAB) to avoid it. On a success, the creature moves to a random adjacent square. On a failure, the creature is launched upward by the column. If there is a ceiling at most 20 feet above the floor where the column erupts, a creature who fails its save takes 1d6 bludgeoning damage/point of BAB you have (minimum 1d6, maximum 10d6) and then falls into a random square adjacent to the column. If there is not a ceiling within 20 ft of the floor, the creature falls in a random square within 10 ft of the column and takes 3d6 falling damage.

Fleet of Foot: You have been adopted by the wind spirits and may when needed move at their speed. When you use this ability you may move up to 100 miles per round. You may move with this increased speed for a total number of rounds per day equal to your BAB. You may only travel to places you would normally be able to go simply using movement modes for which you have a listed speed; for instance, if you cannot fly, cannot walk on water, and do not have a swim speed, you may not cross a body of water without taking a bridge. You also may not unlock doors, though you may pass through unlocked ones. You may take one additional creature with you per 3 points of BAB; for this purpose, Large creatures count as 2 creatures, Huge creatures count as 4, and so forth.

Feel the Ether: You can feel the subtle vibrations in reality caused by creatures teleporting. Whenever a creature teleports into your threatened area, you may take an Attack of Opportunity against it. Whenever a creature teleports to within 5 ft/BAB of you, you immediately know where the teleporting creature(s) will arrive, and may take an immediate action to move up to your speed.

I like a BaB-focused ability that allows characters to do much more than their job description (Hey! Why is the fighter digging around all of a sudden?), but what level do you feel stuff like this should be doled out? Certainly something like this at lower-levels kinda makes casters far weaker than they are.

[Remuko]

With regard to the question of "what abilities should we give non-spellcasters in order to increase their capability", I would like to see a lot more ability for non-spellcasters to shape the battlefield, before and during a battle, as well as some ways to affect when and where combat occurs. As it is, spellcasters have many options for this, including divinations, battefield control spells, teleport effects, and so on. Some ideas I have for non-spellcaster abilities are below. I tried to come up with abilities that would be important and useful while still feeling very "physical", which might differentiate them from spellcasters, whose abilities often seem ephemeral. The numbers I have below are simply my first thoughts.

Constructor: In one hour, you construct fortifications out of the natural resources around you. For instance, if you are in a forest, you may make them out of wood, and you may use stone almost anywhere. You may mix materials you have access to. The fortifications may take any shape you desire, such as a wall, keep, or castle, with a total volume not to exceed ten 10-ft cubes per point of BAB. You decide all details of its construction, including whether it has crenellations, its type of doors or windows, and any secret passages. You may include decorations such as carvings or sculptures, but these may require a Craft check.

Earthshaker: As a standard action, you may strike the ground below you with a limb or weapon, causing reverberations in the earth. This vibration causes a 20 foot tall, 5-ft diameter column of earth and stone to erupt out of the ground at a point you designate within 5ft/level of your location. This column has been shifted up from the ground below, and is thus there permanently. Any creature standing over the column may make a Reflex save (DC 10 + your BAB) to avoid it. On a success, the creature moves to a random adjacent square. On a failure, the creature is launched upward by the column. If there is a ceiling at most 20 feet above the floor where the column erupts, a creature who fails its save takes 1d6 bludgeoning damage/point of BAB you have (minimum 1d6, maximum 10d6) and then falls into a random square adjacent to the column. If there is not a ceiling within 20 ft of the floor, the creature falls in a random square within 10 ft of the column and takes 3d6 falling damage.

Fleet of Foot: You have been adopted by the wind spirits and may when needed move at their speed. When you use this ability you may move up to 100 miles per round. You may move with this increased speed for a total number of rounds per day equal to your BAB. You may only travel to places you would normally be able to go simply using movement modes for which you have a listed speed; for instance, if you cannot fly, cannot walk on water, and do not have a swim speed, you may not cross a body of water without taking a bridge. You also may not unlock doors, though you may pass through unlocked ones. You may take one additional creature with you per 3 points of BAB; for this purpose, Large creatures count as 2 creatures, Huge creatures count as 4, and so forth.

Feel the Ether: You can feel the subtle vibrations in reality caused by creatures teleporting. Whenever a creature teleports into your threatened area, you may take an Attack of Opportunity against it. Whenever a creature teleports to within 5 ft/BAB of you, you immediately know where the teleporting creature(s) will arrive, and may take an immediate action to move up to your speed.

i like all of this a lot.

[Ignimortis]

What exactly is this supposed to fix? Also note, that the ABP assumes that you get a full equivalent to the normal stuff you can buy (actually, the implementation has some problems like having lower bonuses compared to real PCs with some specialization in their equipment). Which means that anyone who gets lower than full bonus simply ignores it and simply buys the normal stuff. Or maybe that even full ABP classes buy something which has a higher bonus. Unless you say that the ABP rules import also includes the removal of all items which improve ABP bonus like-bonuses.

Except they explicitly do. The ABP rules are supposed to remove "the big six" type of item, the only purpose of which is to increase your passive stats. Granted, the progression is slow, and it doesn't really help matters much, but it's a start.

[death390]

Except they explicitly do. The ABP rules are supposed to remove "the big six" type of item, the only purpose of which is to increase your passive stats. Granted, the progression is slow, and it doesn't really help matters much, but it's a start.

yeah but standard progression barely fixes anything in the first place (for many it doesn't), due to how slow the progression is. but to get it even slower just wouldn't help, add in the fact that unless it is an untyped bonus the PC's would just buy what they need anyway nullifying the bonus gained in the first place. IF it WAS an untyped bonus then you get double dipping problem where they buy the items anyway and then get the slow progression on top of it.

[upho]

Except they explicitly do.

That part was obviously not (originally) intended by heavyfuel to be imported, hence:

Unless you say that the ABP rules import also includes the removal of all items which improve ABP bonus like-bonuses.

That /snip/ part might be interesting

Nor is that part somehow required for the system to work at all, though without it the system sorta encourages many builds to spend gold on big six stuff anyways. This inflexibility is also the major reason I don't use the system in my own games, even though I really would've preferred big six not being item bonuses.

Instead, I use the alternative item rules from DSP's Steelforge, which simply allows any and all big six and skill competence bonuses (of +1 to +10) to be added to any slotted item without increased costs due to improper slot or effect stacking, regardless of any other magic effects granted by that item, big six or not. Which means the cost of for example a Belt of Physical Perfection +6 goes from 144k to 108k (no x1.5 stacking costs), and the bonuses aren't bound to the belt slot. This is of course a greater boon for non-casters than for casters, the former being much more dependent on magic item bonuses (especially big six) than the latter.

And since this allows for having several different effects on the same item at no additional cost, the silly "christmas tree" effect can thankfully also be cut considerably.

[Ignimortis]

That actually got me thinking...what if you could get and equip one magic item per non-spellcasting level, and couldn't equip magic items at all if all you have are spellcaster levels? That might need refinement, but the basic idea seems rather interesting.

[upho]

You're surely right regarding mid-to-high op games, but the premise of my assertion was that the DM ran naive challenges, and the players made beginner mistakes -- so the casters might be a blaster-Wizard and a bear-Druid, for whom T3 challenges are par.

With that premise, I think I agree. And if the players in such a game are generally better at building PCs than playing them, the casters might actually be the ones in most need of combat help.

That said, IME the kinds of very low-op games required for this to be true (games barely at blaster-wizard/bear-druid comparable levels) are rare once the group have played more than say a campaign or two. Meaning I think it's generally much more likely less experienced players discover strong caster combat options and/or pure win buttons, and typically also find it much easier to benefit from those in-game, than it is for such players to optimize non-caster combat prowess to the point it has any comparable impact on the outcome of combats, at least in mid and high levels.

Well, it's the sort of people who wander in and tell us that they've been playing the game for 10 years now, and it didn't feel broken, so how can we say it's broken?

Basically, the people who make the argument today weren't here when the same argument was raised last month.

Course. My thought was just that since these people must at least have read enough to have a general impression of the community's views, and since variants of this question/opinion has been popping up frequently and regularly in forums like this for more than 15 years by now, one might think the probability for these people to have stumbled across at the very least one of these previous questions/opinions and related replies should be very high by now.

So, we tell them the answer, and we expect a new poster next month.

Yeah, looking back at the last 15 years, there are no indications of this actually changing, apparently regardless of mentioned probabilities.

[upho]

It's not that myself or most other people don't see any imbalance. That's not the issue. The issue is that in most games the imbalance never matters.

Thing is, as Nifft said, once a game runs into C/MD issues, it tends to quickly escalate to become pretty darn serious IME. And a non-trivial part of the very reason why this is the case is that most groups have never needed to consider such serious balance issues, which means they're not only poorly equipped to deal with it, but also to actually realize what is about to happen and why before the issue becomes serious enough to ruin the fun.

IF a game is going to be high OP and IF the game is expected to run to 20th level or even beyond, then yeah, we can talk about homebrew fixes to make martials/mundanes a bit more useful...

If a group is already capable of deciding and defining a game's expected mechanical PC power before the game starts, it's not very likely the game will also run into C/MD issues. In that case, the reason for using balance fixes such as the ones discussed in this thread is primarily to increase the number of character concepts which can be appropriately mechanically reflected, not to prevent C/MD issues from occurring.

As far as mundanes being outshone to the point of being virtually useless, how often does that REALLY happen in practice?

I've personally played in a 3.5 game in which this happened, big time, despite having a competent DM and most players being knowledgeable enough even to create pretty balanced homebrew options. (For example, I played a ranged rogue mostly based on a homebrew sniper PrC and Savage Species-like racial progression levels, none of which I'd now consider OP in a T3-ish game.) None of us had visited any char-op forums at that time, but we sure wished we had when we actually found out how much the 3.5 online community already knew about our problems, even though at the time it couldn't offer much in the way of viable solutions outside of vastly reducing the number of allowed PC options.

I feel that a lot of the concerns expressed here are overblown to a certain degree. All classes have a role to play and while some become less effective at higher levels, it can still be a fun experience regardless even if that means riding the bench sometimes.

If you had said this to me 15 years ago, I most likely would've agreed. Having experienced a game running into much more serious yet unintentional C/MD problems, as well as games with greatly improved balance through various homebrew fixes, I no longer believe the concerns are overblown, nor that one should be satisfied with half of the classes dictating your role or that the game "can still be a fun experience".

[Talakeal]

Not really. Throughout their careers differing T1s perform various tasks easier or with less spent resources than each other if they've even reach a level where they've access to the other's tricks at all. In a game where everyone has some level of access to all tricks with effort it becomes less about what you ultimately can do, and more about what you can do easily. A game of opportunity cost as opposed to absolute cost. This is most important at the low levels and gradually slackens as increasing level affords more freedom. At high levels things that make you unique are less spell list access and more prestige class benefits unless you've a list no one else in the party bothered to expand into. Could be because they wanted more prestige class benefits.

Exactly which part of my statement are you disagreeing with?

Tier 2 is defined as game breaking power at mid levels with standard levels of optimization, Tier 1 is that + great versatility.

It is possible to make full casters without game breaking power or characters that are stronger and / or more versatile than existing tier 3s, but 3.5 doesn't have any.

The problem, I think, is that what Talakeal wants in terms of differentiation is for some things to be adventures. When you ask people how the Fighter should get to another plane, the answer is almost always either "get a Wizard to do it" or "find a portal". But the problem is that those things aren't different ways of overcoming the challenge, they are lower level ways of overcoming the challenge. There was nothing stopping the Wizard (actually, the Cleric -- hey look, a way casting classes are different) from finding planar portal, it's just not as good as using plane shift. It's like the Frank Trollman quote from earlier says. What the people who dislike the idea of Fighters being buffed want is for their characters to be low level. When you ask people how they would like Fighters to solve problems, their answer is "with low level solutions".

Maybe?

I am still not quite sure about your definition of "high level".

If you mean character level, it is possible to have a character that increases in power without increasing in versatility and vice versa. I can easily imagine a high level evoker who can turn entire cities to ash with a wave of his hand but still be no more capable at traveling the planes without ever gaining the ability to cast plane-shift, and I don't think there is anything wrong with having clearly defined character limits at any level.

I don't think every member of the party needs to be able to do everything. If they need to do something that nobody in their party can do they can go on an adventure to find an extraordinary solution, or they can just buy a consumable item, or get someone else to do it for them (whether this is through purchasing services, summoning a minion, or whatever), or get a magic item to do it for them (I would go with the latter if it is going to be a major element of the campaign).

Would you mind linking the Trollman quote again? I am not seeing it.

[EldritchWeaver]

It's supposed to let lower tier classes have more diverse magical items and not have to focus so much in +X bonus. Gaining more utility instead of simply better numbers

Unless you say that the ABP rules import also includes the removal of all items which improve ABP bonus like-bonuses.

That second part might be interesting

Except they explicitly do. The ABP rules are supposed to remove "the big six" type of item, the only purpose of which is to increase your passive stats. Granted, the progression is slow, and it doesn't really help matters much, but it's a start.

That's right. ABP is not meant to be used in parallel with the standard items, so either you employ nonetheless both, so people can concentrate their wealth on the important bonuses or end up ignoring it with a slow progression, or you give only the big 6 stuff to to martials and similar, which ends up screwing over casters - at least until they can afford to use buff spells. Starting at level 12 they can use Extend Spell to get all benefits, which means that instead of money they expend spell slots. Unless they craft an item which does the casting for them.

Also, outside the big six the magic items are effectively portable spells, so trying to buff martials with magic items is effectively to make them limited casters.

yeah but standard progression barely fixes anything in the first place (for many it doesn't), due to how slow the progression is. but to get it even slower just wouldn't help, add in the fact that unless it is an untyped bonus the PC's would just buy what they need anyway nullifying the bonus gained in the first place. IF it WAS an untyped bonus then you get double dipping problem where they buy the items anyway and then get the slow progression on top of it.

The bonuses have the same types as the stuff which they are supposed to replace.

That part was obviously not (originally) intended by heavyfuel to be imported, hence:Nor is that part somehow required for the system to work at all, though without it the system sorta encourages many builds to spend gold on big six stuff anyways. This inflexibility is also the major reason I don't use the system in my own games, even though I really would've preferred big six not being item bonuses.

Instead, I use the alternative item rules from DSP's Steelforge, which simply allows any and all big six and skill competence bonuses (of +1 to +10) to be added to any slotted item without increased costs due to improper slot or effect stacking, regardless of any other magic effects granted by that item, big six or not. Which means the cost of for example a Belt of Physical Perfection +6 goes from 144k to 108k (no x1.5 stacking costs), and the bonuses aren't bound to the belt slot. This is of course a greater boon for non-casters than for casters, the former being much more dependent on magic item bonuses (especially big six) than the latter.

And since this allows for having several different effects on the same item at no additional cost, the silly "christmas tree" effect can thankfully also be cut considerably.

Granted, Steelforge makes some stuff cheaper, but I don't think it addresses the same problem as ABP.

[skunk3]

Thing is, as Nifft said, once a game runs into C/MD issues, it tends to quickly escalate to become pretty darn serious IME. And a non-trivial part of the very reason why this is the case is that most groups have never needed to consider such serious balance issues, which means they're not only poorly equipped to deal with it, but also to actually realize what is about to happen and why before the issue becomes serious enough to ruin the fun.

If a group is already capable of deciding and defining a game's expected mechanical PC power before the game starts, it's not very likely the game will also run into C/MD issues. In that case, the reason for using balance fixes such as the ones discussed in this thread is primarily to increase the number of character concepts which can be appropriately mechanically reflected, not to prevent C/MD issues from occurring.

I've personally played in a 3.5 game in which this happened, big time, despite having a competent DM and most players being knowledgeable enough even to create pretty balanced homebrew options. (For example, I played a ranged rogue mostly based on a homebrew sniper PrC and Savage Species-like racial progression levels, none of which I'd now consider OP in a T3-ish game.) None of us had visited any char-op forums at that time, but we sure wished we had when we actually found out how much the 3.5 online community already knew about our problems, even though at the time it couldn't offer much in the way of viable solutions outside of vastly reducing the number of allowed PC options.

If you had said this to me 15 years ago, I most likely would've agreed. Having experienced a game running into much more serious yet unintentional C/MD problems, as well as games with greatly improved balance through various homebrew fixes, I no longer believe the concerns are overblown, nor that one should be satisfied with half of the classes dictating your role or that the game "can still be a fun experience".

I think that where we disagree is what actually constitutes a "C/MD issue." I am assuming here that some things you would consider to be an issue, I would consider to be a non-issue. If a party member all of a sudden becomes far more powerful due to a feat, level benefits / class features, or the like then obviously the dynamic of the group is going to shift a bit but how is it an issue exactly? I guess what I am not understanding here is what precisely it is that you consider to be problematic other than certain classes outshining others. Is there something more to it than that?

The only scenarios in which I can imagine these sorts of 'issues' occurring in is a game in which:

A) One or more players are intentionally powergaming and trying to be as OP as possible (looking at forums such as this and copying builds or taking ideas to make their own variants)

B) One person in the game has far more knowledge of the system than everyone else, and while they aren't powergaming per se, they are still far more effective than everyone else

C) The DM approves anything and everything a player wants to take, from levels to feats, leading to an unintentional synergistic huge boost in overall power/effectiveness that isn't matched by the rest of the group

D) The DM has a 'Magic Mart' policy in which they let players buy anything they want as long as they can afford it, which results in PC's become hyper-specialized or really, really effective at doing a particular thing


...and so on.

I think that as long as everyone is transparent and honest about things from the start (and are capable of being mature and sensible) then most issues can either be avoided or fixed.

I have never played under a DM that has allowed any online homebrew stuff at all because while there might be some good stuff out there that is balanced and makes sense, there's soooo much that is totally absurd and/or stupid. I've always stuck to what is contained in the official books. I've only been playing 3.5 for a bit over 10 years now, which is nothing compared to some people. However, that being said, I've played under several DM's and have played a wide variety of classes and seen lots of classes played out. In all of that time I've never seen a game get past level 13-14 or so, so maybe these issues you are talking about primarily happen in higher-level games?

Also, I tend to pick my class after everyone else when starting a new game so I can try to fill in a missing role... sneaky dude, meat shield, healbot, blaster, whatever. Most of the time I am a mundane character so I guess that I am used to not being the star of the show.

[Cosi]

narratively powerful like teleport.

Players should have narratively powerful abilities. Being able to direct the narrative is part of the reason to play a TTRPG instead of a computer game.

That depends on what tier list you use, Shugenjas get teleport and domain adepts can get the travel domain. Warmages ecletic ACF can let it grab teleport or planeshift with its advanced learning and then there is the nonclass options like arcane domain and fiendish heritage feats or just using magic items. Now obviously it is much narrower and/or coming at a higher cost for them than that of a tier 1/2.

Sure, I missed on teleport (though I only count the Shugenja). But I think the point obviously stands -- abilities the alter the narrative belong almost exclusively to Tier One/Tier Two classes.

There is a problem with giving noncombat abilities to the iconic martial class of D&D: Said class is only characterized as a "fighter". Much the same is true of the silver-medal martial class, the barbarian. These two classes really can't have any thematic non-combat abilities aside from "break stuff" and "threaten to break stuff," since their core concepts are basically "guy who fights" and "guy who fights while mad".

While I agree about the Fighter, I think the Barbarian could easily extend to non-combat abilities. Throw some spirit or totem powers in there and you're good to go. The Barbarian could easily walk in with whatever spirit abilities you felt were appropriate.

Actually, using the portal is better than casting Plane Shift in a number of ways - the most obvious of which is conservation of resources. Subtlety, not giving away your capabilities... there's lots of reasons using the existing portal could be a better plan.

All of those sound like different ways of saying "it is a low level option". Yes, sometimes you might use a low level option. But you have to also have high level options.

I'd simply add a number of (Su) flight minutes/day to any martial stance of say 3rd level or higher. Magic, in the "supernatural" sense, is required for "super-jump-flight" anyways, and in order to get martials up to scratch in other regards for that matter.

You could also move the flght stance (in Tome of Battle it's 8th level I think) down to ~5th level.

Sure. But the swiss army shtick isn't really the goal I was trying to describe. It's about adding stuff which: a) makes an entire specific shtick combo like Tripstarring applicable in a greater number of scenarios - but far from every scenario - and b) can use of many of the shtick's required individual investments (feats, items, stat priorities etc) in other combos applicable in other scenarios.

I suppose that's a way of making it work. But I don't think it wins on merits (I would prefer making individual options more effective), and I don't think it's easier.

The last such incident I can recall in a game I played in myself included a long chain of mostly non-magic but nasty defenses guarding the entrance passage to the keep in a huge fortress, taken over by goblinoids led by a group of evil wizards and clerics (none of a level/CR much higher than that of the 9th level party). Teleport made the whole thing a cake-walk, while it otherwise would've been a pretty significant challenge requiring a lot of creative thinking and numerous different talents (including other spells). But come to think of it, I don't really believe it's a particularly great example, since I think using teleport was also a pretty creative and far from obvious solution. And our DM agreed, though we felt kinda cheated when he later told us about the awesome potential social interactions with hobgoblin generals and bugbear chefs we missed...

I think "there is a fortress, go kill the guy holed up in it" isn't a high level adventure. It's a high level encounter, and teleport is very much how you solve it. The high level version of that adventure spreads the enemies out, and hides who it is you're actually after.

The game is as imbalanced as people claim, but it's not usually relevant because people usually play low-level games with badly made characters vs. badly run opposition, so it usually all evens out. The imbalance should be addressed anyway because if you don't, you're playing golf on a mine-field. Most of the time you'll be fine, but that one time when you're not fine is highly relevant even if it's not common.

The deeper problem with imbalance is that it manifests in how games are played. If the Fighter doesn't have non-combat options, the game can't include extended non-combat sequences or challenges where non-combat abilities are necessary.

We take the Automatic Bonus Progression from Pathfinder and make it not tied to Character Level, but to "Tier Level"

Bigger numbers doesn't fix the problems Fighters have. Fighters need other abilities. Though having ABP as the baseline is probably a good idea because it makes people less dependent on magic items.

I don't think every member of the party needs to be able to do everything. If they need to do something that nobody in their party can do they can go on an adventure to find an extraordinary solution, or they can just buy a consumable item, or get someone else to do it for them (whether this is through purchasing services, summoning a minion, or whatever), or get a magic item to do it for them (I would go with the latter if it is going to be a major element of the campaign).

None of those are acceptable. They make the game drag to a halt for what should be a minor obstacle. Just as it should not be possible for a 5th level combat challenge -- any 5th level combat challenge -- to require an entire adventure for a 15th level party -- any 15th level party, it should not be possible for a 5th level non-combat challenge -- any 5th level non-combat challenge -- to require an entire adventure for a 15th level party -- any 15th level party. If the game is going to have expectations for non-combat challenges, characters have to be able to deal with those challenges, and that means that characters have to scale in versatility. If you want a randomly selected party to fail to have an answer to less than one encounter in a hundred, each character has to be able to deal with 70% of challenges. That means out of ten encounters that require teleport-tier abilities, the Fighter has to have something to do in seven of them. Realistically, he should have something great to do in four, something okay to do in three, and something ineffective to do in the last three. Otherwise the game shuts down when you roll a party of a Fighter, a Barbarian, a Ranger, and a Monk.

Would you mind linking the Trollman quote again? I am not seeing it.

I don't know where that one is from. Arbane is the one who links it.

[upho]

Granted, Steelforge makes some stuff cheaper, but I don't think it addresses the same problem as ABP.

You're right that it doesn't. But my point was more that I believe it's about the same relative boost to martials as ABP (used in its entirety for all PCs) but doesn't come with the same inherent inflexibility.

And of course, one could also simply give something like 10-20% extra WBL per martial level.

I think that where we disagree is what actually constitutes a "C/MD issue." I am assuming here that some things you would consider to be an issue, I would consider to be a non-issue. If a party member all of a sudden becomes far more powerful due to a feat, level benefits / class features, or the like then obviously the dynamic of the group is going to shift a bit but how is it an issue exactly? I guess what I am not understanding here is what precisely it is that you consider to be problematic other than certain classes outshining others. Is there something more to it than that?

I understand why this may seem weird to someone who hasn't experienced it, as it may be difficult to see how large an impact the issue typically has on the game in its entirety. Here's an example: if the mechanical tools available to one or more party members are completely over-shadowed by those available to one or more of the other party members, not only is the weaker PCs' tools effectively rendered meaningless and the game very likely less fun for the players of the weaker PCs, but the DM's job also becomes increasingly difficult or simply impossible. How do you offer challenges appropriate for the strong PCs that won't be far too difficult/dangerous for the weaker ones, or challenges appropriate for the weaker PCs without having the stronger ones solving it without breaking a sweat?

Even in the rare case the players actually start out thinking it'll be fun playing "Willy Wizard and the Meaningless Martials" or "The Casting Crew (and random muggle hangarounds)", the DM will typically find it very hard to keep the game interesting for everyone past the earliest levels, since from a mechanical POV, the group will increasingly be playing two different games simultaneously. Of course, the DM could have the game focus entirely on stuff which aren't much affected by the mechanics, but in that case the group would be better off playing free-from instead of the very mechanics-heavy 3.5/PF. Note also that while the C/MD issue may seem largely separate from the fluff of PC's (and that of other creatures), in practice it also creates growing discrepancies between the fluff and the crunch, typically resulting in rapidly decreasing verisimilitude.

Similarly, the C/MD issue isn't made much easier to ignore through great RP, interesting PCs and an amazing story. (For example, the mentioned C/MD-ruined game I played in also had a fairy-tale inspired and very wonky yet adorable group of oddball PCs we all absolutely loved playing, and still regard as some of our most favorite and memorable characters ever from almost 40 years of TTRPG gaming. To give you an idea, the party included an extremely cute but somewhat borderline and whimsical party-loving petal sorcerer, who slept in a tiny velvet-padded bedroom built into the top of the helmet worn by his old best friend, the party's ugly and restless but endearingly naive, kind and loyal goody-two-shoes half-ogre fighter/barb.)

The only scenarios in which I can imagine these sorts of 'issues' occurring in is a game in which:

A) One or more players are intentionally powergaming and trying to be as OP as possible (looking at forums such as this and copying builds or taking ideas to make their own variants)

B) One person in the game has far more knowledge of the system than everyone else, and while they aren't powergaming per se, they are still far more effective than everyone else

C) The DM approves anything and everything a player wants to take, from levels to feats, leading to an unintentional synergistic huge boost in overall power/effectiveness that isn't matched by the rest of the group

D) The DM has a 'Magic Mart' policy in which they let players buy anything they want as long as they can afford it, which results in PC's become hyper-specialized or really, really effective at doing a particular thing

It doesn't really require any of these things, especially not to the level you describe. Besides, most games/groups include some or all of these to a certain degree, and that's often enough due to how imbalanced the system itself is. And of course, the more challenging the game is, the higher the risk.

I think that as long as everyone is transparent and honest about things from the start (and are capable of being mature and sensible) then most issues can either be avoided or fixed.

Of course, but that also inevitably means that the game is restricted, and it requires everyone to fully understand what may actually turn out to be OP/UP in the game, which seems to rarely be the case in most groups. I do pretty much this in my own games, but I also include several new options to increase the number possible character concepts which can be reflected mechanically at the proper power level, replacing most of the options which aren't appropriate and therefore difficult to use (such as full casting progression in my games).

I have never played under a DM that has allowed any online homebrew stuff at all because while there might be some good stuff out there that is balanced and makes sense, there's soooo much that is totally absurd and/or stupid. I've always stuck to what is contained in the official books. I've only been playing 3.5 for a bit over 10 years now, which is nothing compared to some people. However, that being said, I've played under several DM's and have played a wide variety of classes and seen lots of classes played out. In all of that time I've never seen a game get past level 13-14 or so, so maybe these issues you are talking about primarily happen in higher-level games?

They're typically far more serious in late levels, but they can also start becoming noticable as early as 5th. Creating and properly analyzing mechanics requires a lot of system mastery, of course. But I surely wouldn't trust content to be more balanced simply because it's official 1PP, as evidenced by the thousands of posts discussing the C/MD issue. PF also includes a good example, with most Dreamscarred Press (3PP) material (notably Psionics, Path of War and Akashic Mysteries) being far better balanced than Paizo material, especially when compared only to the core 1PP options.

[Nifft]

The deeper problem with imbalance is that it manifests in how games are played. If the Fighter doesn't have non-combat options, the game can't include extended non-combat sequences or challenges where non-combat abilities are necessary.

I'd argue that symptom has several possible causes, including player expectations. For example, I had one Wizard player who needed to "get his gun off" every session, so there had to be combat every single session or he'd leave unhappy. No matter what class that guy played, the game couldn't include extended non-combat sequences and also include him.

Another design failure which leads to that same issue is niche protection. For example, very party needs a Rogue because every dungeon needs traps because the Rogue needs something special to do. Skills like Pick Pockets in earlier editions were even more constraining -- at least Sleight of Hand encourages finding some creative uses.


So, yeah, you do want to fix the class palette to not include classes which can only engage in small slices of the game. But doing that won't necessarily fix the game.

[Arbane]

If level 15+ martials need to be superheroes to compete, you might as well throw in flight and breath weapons and stuff.

Superheroes? You mean unlike the totally realistic wizard, who has been flying and throwing lightning-bolts since level 5?

And yes, a fighter who can't fly in some way by around MID-levels isn't going to achieve much.

the only current fix for out of combat is currently skills in the case of mundane characters. that being said there is not much that can be done about that, other than give everyone more skill points, this is part of why i like the pathfinder approach to skills but find that there are still not enough for the classes. a rouge gets 8-10+ int in a list of 36 skills... these are out skill monkeys and they still barely have enough to cover their bases. it is worse in 3.5 where there are about 45 skills and its 2:1 ratio for cross class. even then in 3.5 no one can find traps without trapfinding, nor can they track without the feat (which is a huge investment).

hell double every classes base amount (rouge gets 16+int) with a minimum of 6+int. so that skills actually get more use. it is honestly a cop out how little skills everyone gets. several of the skills should just be 1 rank per level because they are so important (perception, 1 profession, diplomacy) but that would make everyone equal and some people are not as good as others so the choice should be there to put less ranks in a skill. this doesn't even touch the mult-skill categories: craft, profession, speak language. these categories themselves could take a large chuck of the points.

i mean honestly how many people have made backstories where they are a guard/ farmer/ street thief and actually used some of their precious points in profession? i don't because there arn't enough to keep up with what is minimally needed.

And I agree. There's NEVER enough skillpoints. (Probably an artifact of the decision that all the PCs in a party, TOGETHER, should equal roughly 1.5 competent adventurers.)

[death390]

Superheroes? You mean unlike the totally realistic wizard, who has been flying and throwing lightning-bolts since level 5?

And yes, a fighter who can't fly in some way by around MID-levels isn't going to achieve much.



And I agree. There's NEVER enough skillpoints. (Probably an artifact of the decision that all the PCs in a party, TOGETHER, should equal roughly 1.5 competent adventurers.)

you know that is a good question to ask, WHY are there so few skill points? even casters get shafted with this.

in PHB alone we have a wide gap of skill points (not yet looking at class skill cause thats another issue [pathfinder fixed that though]);

Rouge 8+ int

Ranger/ Bard 6 + int

Barbarian/ druid/ monk 4 + int

cleric/ fighter/ paladin/ Sorc/ Wizard 2 + int

out of all these classes only the wizard has a mandatory above 10 Int. the rest will probably just put what is needed for comat expertise (if using it) or RP purposes. the rest often have it as a dump stat or base 10. remember that 3d6 has an average of 10.5 on the roll, standard array only has 2 stats above a 11 (non-elite array), and point buy often is low on points so leaving it a dump stat doesn't matter for most. this means that while the wizard generally will be closer to the ranger/bard in skill points most characters get equal to or less points than what is listed with a couple using good rolls/ higher int for RP will have 1-2 more.

looking at the bottom of the list we have the fighter who should have more points due to their roles being guards and sentries meaning that just off the top of my head they want search/ spot/ listen; additionally they want high physical skills climb/ balance/ use rope/ jump/ swim since they often will have higher penalties from armor. then they probably should have profession (guard/ soldier), knowledge (local) / intimidate / sense motive as a guard and if a soldier survival and heal.

paladin basically has a similar issue of needing higher physical skills due to armor, knowledge (religion), and everyone needs spot/ search/ listen.

Cleric is often a paladin without the crap casting and mount so also needs better physical skills due to armor (except cloistered cleric but that's not PHB), knowledge (religion) and probably a few others on top of that; (planes) for example, everyone needs spot/ search/ listen, and probably profession (priest/ scribe).

and lastly the poor Sorc probably the most boned out of all casters. is Cha based so basically gets defaulted to the party face if no bard/ rouge (and sometimes even then). the sorc can be anyone from any walk of life due to the style of the character; a person who spontaneously gains the ability to cast magic. so who am i? a soldier who found the arcane in the midst of a battle, a aristocrat charming my way through the courts, a cleric of boccob, a farmhand defending my livestock, a thief on the run from my latest heist. the rest of the classes often have an inbuilt idea of who the character is but the sorc mostly doesn't... due to this they often have large skill requirements but can't ever make the grade often only taking only diplomacy as it is cross class and thats it unless they have higher than 11 INT. not to mention they ONLY get a familiar as a bonus while druid/ ranger get a bunch of stuff and an animal companion; and the wizard get a familiar, feats, and more spells.

all of these characters have skill needs in the 10-12 range on average and can't do it due to how few they have; not to mention most of those skill are cross class on top of it. (sorc gets only 6 class skills even the fighter gets 7!

[PairO'Dice Lost]

you know that is a good question to ask, WHY are there so few skill points?

Because of this oft-missed sidebar in the PHB:

When you create your character, you will probably only be able to purchase ranks in a handful of skills. It may not seem as though you have as many skills as real people do—but the skills on your character sheet don’t actually define everything your character can do.

Your character may have solid familiarity with many skills, without having the actual training that grants skill ranks. Knowing how to strum a few chords on a lute or clamber over a low fence doesn’t really mean you have ranks in Perform or Climb. Ranks in those skills represent training beyond everyday use—the ability to impress an audience with a wide repertoire of songs on the lute, or to successfully scale a 100-foot-high cliff face.

So how do normal people get through life without ranks in a lot of skills? For starters, remember that not every use a skill requires a skill check. Performing routine tasks in normal situations is generally so easy that no check is required. And when a check might be called for, the DC of most mundane tasks rarely exceeds 10, let alone 15. In day-to-day life, when you don’t have enemies breathing down your neck and your life depending on success, you can take your time and do things right—making it easy, even without any ranks in the requisite skill, to succeed (see Checks without Rolls, page 65).

You’re always welcome to assume that your character is familiar with—even good at, as far as everyday tasks go—many skills beyond those for which you actually gain ranks. The skills you buy ranks in, however, are those with which you have truly heroic potential.

The assumption behind skill points per class and skill DCs was that characters shouldn't need lots of skill ranks to do their jobs, between taking 10 being a thing and high DCs being uncommon. In fact, it was probably expected that PCs would put 5 or 10 points into a bunch of different skills instead of maxing out a few skills, given that that's how non-weapon proficiencies worked in 2e (you'd rather have lots of different NWPs for versatility than stack up lots of slots to get a few +1s to existing NWPs) and given the fact that the designers obviously felt that investing skill points up to the cross-class max was a reasonable life choice.

Of course, it didn't turn out that way. Instead of most guards having no or maybe 1-2 ranks in Spot/Listen/Sense Motive and a "canny guard" having a +5 modifier (as per the sample DCs on DMG p.31) so that a 1st-level rogue could be expected to lie to or sneak past them, guards were expected to have Spot/Listen/Sense Motive as class skills and max them out so that even mid-level PCs were challenged by them. Instead of most checks being taken care of by taking 10 or by not being asked for at all (such as in the skill examples in the DMG, where guiding a mount down the sides of a "steep gully" is only DC 10 and sneaking past some distracted hobgoblin guards is easy because they "aren't even looking at the door, so no Hide check is required") DMs ended up asking for lots of rolls for tasks that really didn't need them, especially things like making Bluff rolls for every sentence or Hide/Move Silently rolls for every move action.

So it's understandable for classes to have their existing base skill points given the original assumptions made by the designers, but given the way the game actually ended up being played they're pretty darn low.

[death390]

you know that actually makes 5e make more sense looking on. 5e uses bounded accuracy to basically make people fail more often (even on stupid simple ****) compared to 3.5 but honestly if they wanted PCs to diversify more they should have made the "ceiling" on skills lower +1 per 2 lvls ( or +.5 per lvl) or something. the idea of "i want to be great at what i do" has always been a thing in ANY rpg.

imagine if the max ranks were 13 instead of 23 (3 to start out at) that would have forced people to diversify, usually on "odd" levels. it also would have caused PrC's skill requirements to be lower, skill focus (and dual skill) feats would have been more useful, and rolling a die would have had more of an impact. hmm cross class skills also would have been easier to maintain as well

of course that could be addressed in the current system by simply doubling the number of skill points available as well, but instead of having a "dead" skill level it would instead have twice as many Maxed skills per level.