I've tinkered with it over the years, but never had a chance to run it (played a few sessions back in college though).
Here are some of my threads on the dead boards:http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=2r8fe0q9li648e5eq9lbu25n11&topic=234.0http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=3001.0
You have replied to both of those, just FYI.
I think one thing that may greatly help your non-channelers is utilizing some Tome of Battle to represent Sword Forms. I included my ideas on that in the first link (third page). Basically cut the initiator levels in half, keep away from the supernatural type maneuvers, and alter Blademaster to grant maneuvers known.
Other ideas that may or may not have been discussed in the above threads:
Use the Vitality/Wounds hit point system. One or two good hits (crits) can take someone out, channeler or not.
If any of the players are ta'veren
, give them (and those around them, ie- the party) action points, ala Eberron/d20 Modern. I believe the way I intended it was a ta'veren
got to roll 1d8 (or multiple d8's at higher levels, use the one highest), while any PC's in their company (100 feet?) got to roll d6's. NPC's would get d4's. Allow action points to be spent to turn one point of Wounds damage into Vitality damage instead, to represent the pull of the Pattern altering a skewering sword thrust into a mere nick.
Grant a few gestalt levels (but not full-on gestalt). My intention with this was to allow for someone to "grow" into learning how to channel, without having to either multiclass into it (ie - losing caster levels is bad) or ignoring the class abilities they have without compensation (yes, I'm a level 1 initiate who is going to learn at the White Tower, but I haven't been trained yet, so I'll act like I have no weaves).
Someone could start play as a Woodsman 1//Wilder 1 and roleplay the process of learning this new, interesting, terrifying thing of Channeling, and have other class abilities to rely upon while doing so.
I was planning on levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 being gestalt. Basically, other than first level, the gestalt levels would have no effect on your BAB and saves, but would get you a few more hp's, more skill points (I'm an Initiate 5//Wanderer 2 - I'm going to join the Brown Ajah), and would allow someone like Rand to be properly built (I'm an undiluted caster on one side, but I also have a handful of levels that allow me to be a bad-ass swordsman).
To take the idea of gestalt in a different direction, allow any level in which someone doesn't take a channeling class to be Gestalt. You could have an Armsman 20//Wanderer 20 vs a Wilder 10/Asha'man 10. That would certainly give the non-casters an edge that would help compensate for the disparity between casters and non casters.
Lastly, have each player run two or three different characters, but never more than one at a time. Look at the characters in the novels and compare their journeys to that of a D&D party. Notice how the WoTers go separate ways, then meet up again later? Their decisions are not influenced by this artificial metagamed concept of "the party" which must stay together. Allow players to rotate out characters, and have two or three story lines running concurrently, and play the different story lines as "chapters." Okay, we're playing Matrim and the Super Girls on the way to Tear for the next 5 game sessions. Then we'll play Perrin and Faile treking to Tear for three sessions, etc.
This last could have an additional aspect to it, taken from the game Ars Magica, that being the idea of the players rotating who is the powerful one. Have each player run a channeler and a non-channeler. Storyline "A" has players 1 and 2 playing channelers, while players 3 and 4 play non-channelers. Storyline "B" is the other way around. This isn't my preferred method, but it is an option that has been used in Gaming before, and it just accepts the fact that channelers simply ARE more powerful than non-channelers, which is a true representation of the novels, if you think about it. Sure, that concept doesn't make for great game balance, but RPG's are rarely perfectly balanced, and when they are (4th ed), people generally dislike it.