The Gaming Den

Whipstitch wrote:I never really understood how clerics were allowed to be so good. My initial reaction to the spell list and all the perks you got through domains in 3rd could best be summed up as "Bwah, what?!". How weird is it that a full caster class can make a pretty defensible dip thanks to the domain bonuses, better access to wands and a bump to the better saves?

pretty much as already said, but the fact people wanted the cleric to just be a healbot or walking first-aid kit...they wanted clerics to be able to do more, so made more for them to do.

rather than ignore the bad players that FORCE a cleric player to act like a healbot, they changed the rules to try to make the bad players have to sit back and watch the game for a while while the cleric dominated.

at least now they understand that tighter rules dont make bad player/DMs better. they just need to be more dedicated to making a game for those that understand it, and those that dont to have it explained better.

K wrote:That being said, there is no need to be reductionist. The potential roles and flavors are inexhaustible.

Sure, after a point no one is going to remember what the Bear Warrior does that the Barbarian doesn't do, but balancing the various classes is pretty easy if you set clear benchmarks of what should be possible.

Of course, DnD hates benchmarks because they are afraid that players will feel bad if they find out that they are a bad player.

I partially agree. There is truly no possible limit to what flavors you can draw upon. Write up a book on how your Drow are pseudo-Aztec and then fill up the book with classes like Jaguar Warrior, Eagle Warrior, Moon Warrior, Nahuali, Rain King, Manflayer, and so on. Pick a part of the fantasy world, pick a part of real world history, mix-n-match some adjectives and nouns, and you have another half dozen classes for an expansion book. Or more.

Protectable Roles is more limited. While in abstract there is no upper limit to what a character could do in a game, in reality there are defined limits as to what a character could do in any particular game. Now, there's no excuse for any RPG worthy of the name to be less complex than a board game like Talisman or Arkham Horror, so your game should be capable of handling several dozens of classes at the low end. But it wouldn't surprise me if you had to start reflavoring or mix-n-matching to make new classes after you already had sixty or so.

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote:I partially agree. There is truly no possible limit to what flavors you can draw upon. Write up a book on how your Drow are pseudo-Aztec and then fill up the book with classes like Jaguar Warrior, Eagle Warrior, Moon Warrior, Nahuali, Rain King, Manflayer, and so on. Pick a part of the fantasy world, pick a part of real world history, mix-n-match some adjectives and nouns, and you have another half dozen classes for an expansion book. Or more.

-Username17

but is Eagle Warrior, Moon Warrior, Pikeman, or Spearman different classes?

pikeman and spearman just have different preferred weapons. otherwise they still poke this with a sharp stick, which is part of what a swordsman (long, bastard, short, etc) does in part.

they picked an appropriate name oddly enough for WotC, when they picked "martial" as a "source" for 4th, as kung fu, karate, etc are all Martial arts.

what does a Moon Warrior do so differently form an Eagle Warrior or fighter that makes it need its own classes? Some flavor text to a style of fighting?

again most of these subclasses, as just mix-and-match, as you say, with little bits of other classes, so they really arent anything different.

part fighter, part cleric doesnt need its own class like Shaman, Paladin, etc. flavor your game the way you wish, but allow proper multiclassing to handle how to get some cleric in your fighter.

that fluff book that adds flavor to a class name is EXACTLY what an expansion is for.

Designer #12 says: Hey look at this character i made using parts fighter and parts cleric classes. Lets give it a name and some fluff and put it in a collection of other pre-made character ideas that ALSO use multiclassing, so people can have something ready and dont have to make their own tweaked version of a shaman.

if the Eagle Warrior changes into an eagle as a special thing.. then is that anything other than a fighter with shapechange/alter self spell ability?

let multiclasing handle this tiny dip into caster to get this ability without having to devote an entire level worth to get ALL the caster base functions.

psuedo-multiclassing if you will...

Fighter can take some Rage (only for fighters) ability (no NOT feat, because a feat is an accomplishment) and that adds flavor to make more like a barbaric character.

Lets call these functions Standard and Options.

Fighter:

Standard:
d20 HP
+1d6 damage
can use ANY weapon (trying to get the grab a chair and hit something with it thing with this one)

Options: (Pick two)
can go into a rage once per combat (+1d6 damage for 3 rounds)
thinks the best offense is a good defense (+1d8 HP)
etc

these are picked when you create your character. say something later allows you to improve your class functions... a wizard wants a little bit of fighter in him he takes the option to best O is good D to get more HP, or wants to have something for when spells run out and takes the option to get pissed off for an extra 1d6 dagger stabbing or quarterstaff thwacking for 3 rounds?

call it... mini-multi-classing, but not making a class

so a fighter can then do the same thing the wizard did and grab a shapechange (eagle) to flavor and mechanize him into being an Eagle Warrior, without having to make the class like a class, when it really offers nothing more than the little extra spell.

the ONLY good thing about the wonky character points system in 2.5 where you could pick abilities like darkvision to make your own type of race, or grab a thing from another class to have a bit of it to make your character stand out from the base Fighter. (off course without the crap in S&P that made the character point system just trash and bloat. AKA you could use a core-rules default but character points you didnt have enough to make the core-rules cleric with.)

It's easy to say "Oh just make a Fighter and a Cleric and let people multiclass them to create whatever fighting/divine magicking hybrids they want" until you sit down and try to come up with a sensible multiclassing system. If there were some magic bullet multiclass system that let you perfectly blend base classes and still end up decent but not ridiculous almost all the time, that would be something.

John Magnum wrote:It's easy to say "Oh just make a Fighter and a Cleric and let people multiclass them to create whatever fighting/divine magicking hybrids they want" until you sit down and try to come up with a sensible multiclassing system. If there were some magic bullet multiclass system that let you perfectly blend base classes and still end up decent but not ridiculous almost all the time, that would be something.

People have been playing GURPS and HERO system for quite a while.

The idea isnt a build-your-own-race/class type of system like those, but to give more mutability between classes, so you dont have to have a special class just to get a little bit of cleric healing to a fighter vis-a-vis Paladin, but can just get some healing without healing surge or Tinkerbell healing.

to make such a system that allows both HARD classes, and mutability. you have to know what each class does (see other thread), and why it exists as a class on its own that makes it special, and then ONLY that class gets that as its prime shtick. then you need a way to let others touch this (paladin a fighter that can heal) without having to load the full class features list into them.

so a cleric gets full access to the divine arts, but a paladin is jsut a fighter that gets some healing and turning. there should be a way for a fighter to get some healing if he wants without the turning, or a fighter to get the turning without the healing if he wants, AND a way for a fighter to get both, without creating a class called Paladin.

just look at all the needless crap a Paladin has (in 2nd at least) that has nothing to do with fighter or cleric.

A paladin is immune to all forms of disease.

this doesnt make any sense that a paladin gets this.. it was added to bloat the fighter/cleric mix to make its own class. if divine interdiction grants this, then it should be something clerics get as well, and a fighter should be able to take it, IF they want that kind of fighter.

the d20 HP isnt something a class other than fighter can have per say, but the other HP bonus mentioned earlier, is a way to take some part of a fighter and give it to say a cleric or wizard without making a Meatshield class that has ungodly HP.

i thought this was the point of 3e multiclassing changes and feats to do this, yet it seems people dont like it?

i dont like feats, but class features need to have a reason to be ONLY for that class, and then a watered down version could grant access to another class to some of these features.

why i say it was ONE of VERY FEW good ideas in 2.5, but needs developed further to make it work. and NOT be full-blown feats that get/got WAY out of hand and stupid.

that way you have actual multiclasing that does what it always did. then mini-multiclassing that lets you mutate a core class into something like a Bard, without having to design a Bard class, and the players can make their own pseudo-class based on a core class, with a few little bits from other classes with those bits being watered down.

GURPS is an system with classes since when?
Dont know about HERO. But since Shadzar used it as example it probably an classles system too.

Stoped reading after the first two sentences...

So you basically want 4e multiclassing?

John Magnum wrote:So you basically want 4e multiclassing?

dont know 4e multiclassing, but i gave exampels of class features and then optional class features, and related to the character point system from 2.5 that feats were designed from that COULD work, if made properly.

what i do NOT want, is classes that are a little bit one class added to another class, because THAT is what multiclassing should be fore rather than gestalt (is that what it was called in 3rd?).

Korwin wrote:GURPS is an system with classes since when?
Dont know about HERO. But since Shadzar used it as example it probably an classles system too.

Stoped reading after the first two sentences...

GURPS is the ultimate multiclass ssyetm since you just buy things. it doesnt have to be a class-based system to allow "build your own class". the classes just arent defined and you kit-bash abilities from what games would have WITH classes, into whatever character you want.

i dont want a classless ability kit-bashing system, but a little bit of kit-bashing with core classes, would work better, than halfbreed predefined classes. (kit-bashing via feats is what made 3rd so popular isnt it? all the character customization options)

So you want Feats, but you don't want to call them Feats, and you want them to give abilities on par with class features, but slightly less good than the actual class features.

Which is actually pretty sound on some level.

i dont want them to have as much as feats do where everything under the sun exists...it should be things that are of a class, and another class that doesnt want to multiclass, can get a few of a different class to make your own hybrid, without having solely made halfbreed or hybrid classes.

no need for a paladin when you can take something that allows some cleric healing if that is all you want your fighter to be able to do, and not be stuck with all the spells and turn undead, and also you are STILL a fighter for all purposes, not a "special" fighter called a paladin.

Bard would pick Fighter, and get a few things from the other 2 classes for the "flavor" of bard, with more focus and function as a fighter.

this helps character diversity of the same clas, and customization without the bloated feats for 3rd and 4th and the fact that they had too much crap. also you dont just add more cleric to your fighter ALL the time when you level, but at certain times. and in doing so you give up one of your own fighter specific choices to get the cleric watered-down feature. it doesnt remove the chance to get Fighter level 6 special feature like 4th has you pick a power now or never get it later kind of thing (see Facebook game), you just pick when your fighter gets what power, and if you skip one now for a little cleric function, you can get it fully working later form your fighter list.

and SOME thing that a fighter gets ONLY a fighter will ever get no other class can have, not even watered down. like say wizard 9th level spells or even above 6th would be wizard only, but SOME spells under there could be for other classes to grab as abilities like the shapechange for the Eagle Warrior Fighter.

so you are pretty much on track Archmage.

shadzar wrote: dont know 4e multiclassing

It's not really multiclassing. You're stuck with your main class while you grab a single power from another one, at the cost of a feat.
Or something like that.

You also usually get a limited version of one of their class features.