The Gaming Den

So with the Classplosion where you have the Ninja, Samurai, Knight, Cock Hurler and so on, would you do a bunch of jagerbombs and come up with new resource mechanics for each one, or generally go "This is a modified Hero, so basically it works like a Hero, with different moves" or "This is like a Rogue/Spirit Shaman, so it has a few conditional abilities as well as a random aspect"?

FrankTrollman wrote:

Laertes wrote:So it's a combination of how steep the learning curve is and how quickly the class's potential is maximised? Got you. That sounds like a good idea, a tricky thing to balance and a questionable thing for setting verisimilitude.

The idea goes back to 1st edition and even before. You had beginner classes, and then you had advanced classes that did more stuff. Actually, AD&D had even more tiers, where they wanted the really new players to tough it out playing Fighting Men until they mastered the game enough to play Rangers and shit, and then once they proved themselves able to handle that kind of stuff it was time for Magic Users, and for people who were beyond even that there was crazy bullshit like the Illusionist and Cavalier. 2nd Edition went with less tiers and more explicitness, where there were basic classes like the Fighter, advanced classes like the Ranger, and Class Kits for expert play.

Now, one of the places where 2nd edition really put their foot in it was the bizarre insistence that Mage was a basic class while Paladin was an advanced class. And that goes hand in hand with the kits thing, where some of the kits were crazy complex like the Bladesinger and others were just a modest reshuffling of your proficiencies like the Amazon.

I expect their thinking was that Paladin should be an "advanced" class due to role-playing difficulty (the severe code of conduct), rather than because of mechanical complexity.

FrankTrollman wrote:

Tussock wrote:Bard => Enchantress.
Barbarian => Berserker.
Cleric => Chosen of ....
Druid => Druid.
Fighter => Warrior.
Monk => Ascetic.
Paladin => Beacon.
Ranger => Assassin.
Rogue => Rogue.
Sorcerer => no. Useful chassis for Psi though. Psion => Sorcerer.
Wizard => Witch, Necromancer, Elemental, Illusionist, Summoner, Wizard, etc, etc.

Most of those are bad. I'll start with the ones I agree with. Barbarian and Fighter do need to go. Berserker is a pretty good class name, so that's the direction you should go. Personally, I don't think "Warrior" should be a PC class, and that if you insist on having mundane warrior classes at all, then you should grab names that imply a certain level of badassery like "Hero," "Knight," or "Samurai." Of those, I think "Hero" works the best.

It's also got historical traction, albeit as 4th level Fighters. I like Warrior because it's level-inclusive, the thugs in the forest can be Warriors (and Rogues), the king's guard can be warriors, Cú Culainn can be a warrior, Sláine can be a warrior, Herecles can be a warrior, though when I think about it all the good ones are Berserkers, aren't they.

Knight and Samurai are decent class concepts, but probably are specific enough to wait for expansion material. "Warrior" is too generic, and has the same basic implications as Fighting Man: characters that are basically bullshit placeholders with swords.

For D&D at least, you need to support a high level idiot with a sword killing a genius, big-ass, fear-spamming, rock-melting dragon by having a sword-class that works for that. Most of the fighter-mage types they produced for 3e could be a good starting point, just re-fluff the spells and let them have high level stuff too.

And you do actually need such a class, to represent the spear holding followers that Warlords (or Marshals or whatever) get for free and which you can hire as mercenaries from settlements.

NPC classes are another interesting conceptual space, especially if they're PC-capable as "low-complexity" options.

The Prince, the Shaman, the Cultist, the Warrior, the Wright, the Thief, the Merchant, the Lover. That's most of the characters from 1001 nights, isn't it? Strangely, that sounds a lot more fun to write than a D&D clone. Hmm. Do D&D classes need more story?

Anyway, "Beacon" and "Ascetic" are dumb class names.

Yeh, I thought I should explain. It's a thing that explain them in 3e without reference to outside material. Internally consistent, if you will. There's no monastries of persecuted minorities, and no round table of knights holding back the growing darkness.

The Beacon (which is a terrible class name, but it's what they are) does the right thing in the right way for the right reasons, and makes it work. Every waking moment is setting an example for how things should be, by doing it Lawful Good and succeeding anyway. They're so fixated on that, any serious failure is often met by turning to Evil, so they can show everyone that their failure is because they left the Good path. A minor sacrifice.

The Ascetic shuns symbols of materialism, including weapons, armour, housing, and mounts. By denying yourself weapons you become a weapon, by denying armour you become protected, by denying shelter you become impervious to the elements, by denying horses you become fleet of foot. It's bullshit IRL, but it's fact in D&D.

Certainly more so than if you called them ascetics, because that word doesn't give you a bad ass matrial artist suggestion on image search at all. I admit that the word monk is problematic, but I've yet to see a suggested replacement that wasn't worse.

Fair, but the "I'm a poor peasant, just ignore me" thing should be part of their class features. Make great spies with all their mini-teleport powers. Make Wizards marked with glowing eyes and stuff to differentiate them.

Bards get to stay being named Bards in exactly the same way and for exactly the same reason that Druids do.

Bards have been intolerably craptastic for too long (like the Druid they do everything, they just suck at all of it), every edition's Bard is a totally different conceptual space, and D&D doesn't really want to do song magic in the first place.

The Beguiler, that's a good class for core. Call it an Enchantress, re-fluff it for voice and song and performance, and be happy to replace the bard with something that works.

I have honestly no idea why you'd want to change the name of Rangers.

Again, because 2nd edition, 3rd edition, and 4th edition Rangers are all shit. An assassin, a social pariah with stealth and wilderness survival and his only friend is a giant bear and has "track down and kill that one guy, then disappear" powers, that could at least work. They could even be good poisoners with herbal lore.

The days of having Clerics of Mielikki and Druids of Mielikki were stupid days, and we should put that shit behind us as quickly as possible.

True that. To be blunt though, you still needs a Cleric class, for the Chosen of Cuthbert.



And really, if you're writing a D&D clone, you should just use the classic D&D names and only use "Enchantress" and "Assassin" in the concept/development phase. If you're not writing a D&D clone, you probably don't want most of those things being classes in the first place. Find a passable story, then write the main character themes out as your classes.

Star Wars should have a Princess, Ace, Mechanic, Dealer, and C3PO. Luke's an Ace, it turns out it's important that someone's good with ship guns, Luke is suddenly amazingly good with ship guns. Also being a targeting computer, LOL. The Princess main power is to get peacefully captured by the bad guys, like at the shield reactor, guess who didn't get shot. Note they can still attack while captured.

Cyberzombie wrote:I never understood the rogue class. It's not a class, it's a skill set.

First of all: Classes are skill sets. If your class is Necromancer, your skill set includes "making an army of the dead."

But more importantly, you need a Rogue. Not because it's massively different in what it can do from a Hero or a Berserker (both of whom need to be able to sneak around), but because a lot of people want to play characters like Aladdin or Han Solo - characters who are able to consistently hit above their weight because of their quick wits. Where the Hero gets to carve up dragons because of his great "sword skill," the Rogue gets to carve up dragons because of his "quick wits." Both characters need to be able to hide in shadows.

And yes, structurally the Rogue and Hero don't need to be different classes. You could just give people martial attacks and let the player flavor them however they want. But players actually derive satisfaction from there being a game mechanical distinction between doing extra damage because of your Knight's Challenge versus doing extra damage because of your Sneak Attack.

Koumei wrote:So with the Classplosion where you have the Ninja, Samurai, Knight, Cock Hurler and so on, would you do a bunch of jagerbombs and come up with new resource mechanics for each one, or generally go "This is a modified Hero, so basically it works like a Hero, with different moves" or "This is like a Rogue/Spirit Shaman, so it has a few conditional abilities as well as a random aspect"?

A mixture of both. Some classes could be reskins of existing classes while others are their own thing. Plenty of room to make an "Invoker" that is basically exactly an Assassin but with a magic skin (instead of "aiming" you spend an equivalent amount of time pointing at the target and chanting). But there's also plenty of room to realize that you fucked up the Warlock's drain mechanics and to come out with a Blood Speaker or something that does drain in a different and hopefully less sucky way (or whatever it is that you feel didn't work properly).

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote: First of all: Classes are skill sets. If your class is Necromancer, your skill set includes "making an army of the dead."

By skill set I mean non-combat skills. Picking locks, sneaking around, bluffing people, disarming traps. These are all "rogue" things, and the thing most closely associated with the class. Some people even refer to him with names like skill-monkey or something similar, but the basic end result is that the rogue is "skill guy", which always ends up being a restriction that the fighter can't be skill guy without encroaching on the rogue's territory.

But more importantly, you need a Rogue. Not because it's massively different in what it can do from a Hero or a Berserker (both of whom need to be able to sneak around), but because a lot of people want to play characters like Aladdin or Han Solo - characters who are able to consistently hit above their weight because of their quick wits. Where the Hero gets to carve up dragons because of his great "sword skill," the Rogue gets to carve up dragons because of his "quick wits." Both characters need to be able to hide in shadows.

I don't think so. Lets look at batman. He sneaks around, picks locks and sneak attacks people. But he's also a good fighter in a straight up fight. Ambushes are just a tool in his toolbox, not his entire combat theme.

But rogues don't get that. They need to sneak attack stuff otherwise they more or less suck. And rogues are relegated into this role because they can't be too good at fighting otherwise they encroach on the fighter's theme, so they're stuck being the sneak attack guy.

In my opinion, sneak attack shouldn't be an entire class theme, it should be one of many selectable abilities. Because Conan sneak attacks people too. Not to mention basing an entire class' combat potential around one ability is boring anyway.

Cyberzombie wrote:

FrankTrollman wrote: First of all: Classes are skill sets. If your class is Necromancer, your skill set includes "making an army of the dead."

By skill set I mean non-combat skills. Picking locks, sneaking around, bluffing people, disarming traps. These are all "rogue" things, and the thing most closely associated with the class. Some people even refer to him with names like skill-monkey or something similar, but the basic end result is that the rogue is "skill guy", which always ends up being a restriction that the fighter can't be skill guy without encroaching on the rogue's territory.

We accept that a Ranger or a Druid can probably track creatures in wilderness areas, right? Tracking is presumably part of those classes' "skill set." But they are not exclusively part of their skill set. You wouldn't think it was weird if a Berserker or Scout could also track, right?

The same should be true of the Rogue. The fact that a Rogue can pick a lock shouldn't mean that an Assassin can't. The fact that a Rogue can pick someone's pocket shouldn't mean that an Illusionist can't. The fact that a Rogue can hide in shadows shouldn't mean that a Hero can't.

But more importantly, you need a Rogue. Not because it's massively different in what it can do from a Hero or a Berserker (both of whom need to be able to sneak around), but because a lot of people want to play characters like Aladdin or Han Solo - characters who are able to consistently hit above their weight because of their quick wits. Where the Hero gets to carve up dragons because of his great "sword skill," the Rogue gets to carve up dragons because of his "quick wits." Both characters need to be able to hide in shadows.

I don't think so. Lets look at batman. He sneaks around, picks locks and sneak attacks people. But he's also a good fighter in a straight up fight. Ambushes are just a tool in his toolbox, not his entire combat theme.

And yet, you'll agree that Batman and Captain America are different characters, right? That they feel different and that people who want to play one or the other would be disappointed if not offended if the characters weren't mechanically distinct, right?

That's why the Rogue and the Hero have to be different classes. Not because you can't be sufficiently reductionist as to make all heroes who punch people use identical rules, but because the players don't want you to.

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote: And yet, you'll agree that Batman and Captain America are different characters, right? That they feel different and that people who want to play one or the other would be disappointed if not offended if the characters weren't mechanically distinct, right?

Sure, and I'd also agree that Lina Inverse, Circe, Harry Potter and Gandalf are different characters, yet they're all wizards in D&D land. The fact that one class can represent a variety of characters isn't a bad thing.

That's why the Rogue and the Hero have to be different classes. Not because you can't be sufficiently reductionist as to make all heroes who punch people use identical rules, but because the players don't want you to.

Are you also planning on having wizards subdivided into blasters, diviners, necromancers, enchanters?

It's a kick in the nuts to allow there to be do-everything arcanists while forcing fighters to subdivide just because one guy wants to be sneaky. Conan used stealth and sneak attacks too and D&D casters can turn fully invisible at 3rd level. Being sneaky isn't a class defining ability.

You wouldn't require a wizard to take a whole new class because he wanted to be able to turn invisible, so why do the same to the martial characters?

This sort of brings the discussion into Prak's previous thread about class chassis.

Captain America and Batman are so similar that, really, they could both be subsets of the hero/martial/warrior chassis. Even... a kit, skill tree, specialization or build-your-own point-buy/list-pick character class.

One has an agility to strength combat style that gives sneak attack proficiencies/bonuses, better reflexes and synergizes with stealth. The other has a strength and endurance style that synergizes with leadership or morale bonuses, tactical bonuses for teams and sucker punches, as well as a bonus to will saves.

Cyberzombie wrote: Are you also planning on having wizards subdivided into blasters, diviners, necromancers, enchanters?

That's been a core conceit of Frank's D&D thought for like...forever. So, yes, I'm sure he is.

Ferret wrote:

Cyberzombie wrote: Are you also planning on having wizards subdivided into blasters, diviners, necromancers, enchanters?

That's been a core conceit of Frank's D&D thought for like...forever. So, yes, I'm sure he is.

Not just since forever, but literally also in this thread, talking about the exact same subject but as it relates to casters he said nearly exactly fucking that.

Cyberzombie wrote: Sure, and I'd also agree that Lina Inverse, Circe, Harry Potter and Gandalf are different characters, yet they're all wizards in D&D land. The fact that one class can represent a variety of characters isn't a bad thing.

I can't speak for Circe, but the other three are similar in that they "cast spells". You actually wouldn't use the same class to play all three. You'd play Lina as a Sorcerer (maybe with one level of Rogue at first level to pad out the skills, or Fighter because she will sword people or dropkick them). She doesn't learn new spells from books and crap, and has a small bunch that she flings about "as much as is necessary".

Gandalf is a demigod of some kind, and basically is a good swordsman. He occasionally casts spells that are impressive for the setting but are low level in D&D. You could totally make him a Duskblade or something stupid like that. Or maybe a low level Wizard with a bunch of Outsider hit dice.

Harry Potter has everyone learning new spells just by seeing new Latin-ish words written down (no really). Which is like Wizards but even more mental. And with way more casting, it seems. But the bit where reading pene anatis and going "Aha! I can now give someone a duck's corkscrew-shaped wang" is a Wizard thing.

Long story short, the examples you used all use their magic (the key feature) in such different ways that if you had to have them side by side in a D&D game, you really wouldn't want to use one class to cover them all.

Koumei wrote:I can't speak for Circe, but the other three are similar in that they "cast spells". You actually wouldn't use the same class to play all three. You'd play Lina as a Sorcerer (maybe with one level of Rogue at first level to pad out the skills, or Fighter because she will sword people or dropkick them). She doesn't learn new spells from books and crap, and has a small bunch that she flings about "as much as is necessary".

I wouldn't peg Lina as a Sorcrerer. She actually did go to school to learn magic and is sometimes roped into giving lectures herself. She doesn't learn spells because she already knows all of the ones she would put any effort into learning. She starts the campaign at a high enough level to causally use max-level spells and learn Infinity+1 spells and only advances past that by learning more Infinity+1 spells or finding artifacts. She's definitely a high level Archmage and is so used to her magic that she doesn't bother with books, but her backstory doesn't fit a Sorcerer.

FrankTrollman wrote:The same should be true of the Rogue. The fact that a Rogue can pick a lock shouldn't mean that an Assassin can't. The fact that a Rogue can pick someone's pocket shouldn't mean that an Illusionist can't. The fact that a Rogue can hide in shadows shouldn't mean that a Hero can't.

But they should have different mechanics for the same purpose, or at least different class abilities which interact differently with a certain skill.

I also don't think you want Gandalf, Lina, and Harry Potter waking up in the morning and all deciding that they're all going to do things the way Circe does them that day.

Cyberzombie wrote: Sure, and I'd also agree that Lina Inverse, Circe, Harry Potter and Gandalf are different characters, yet they're all wizards in D&D land. The fact that one class can represent a variety of characters isn't a bad thing.

That's... pretty much the literal opposite of what we're talking about. Batman and Captain America do, on a fundamental level, the same things that could conceivably be represented using the mechanics of the same class, but Frank advocates keeping them separate because they are presented as being different. Gandalf, Harry and Lina are doing things that are not at all alike, could not be faithfully represented using some unified mechanic, and the only possible reason you'd ever want them to share the same class is that, being "wizards" who use "magic", they are presented as similar.

Koumei wrote:

Cyberzombie wrote:Harry Potter has everyone learning new spells just by seeing new Latin-ish words written down (no really). Which is like Wizards but even more mental. And with way more casting, it seems. But the bit where reading pene anatis and going "Aha! I can now give someone a duck's corkscrew-shaped wang" is a Wizard thing.

Harry Potter wizards cast spontaneously, and I don't know if they have a limit to spells per day. However, it usually takes them a while to learn new spells, and the more powerful spells tend to be harder. For the sake of balance, perhaps some sort of limit to spells per day should be put in. I think some sort of reflavored psionic power point using class would fit well enough. Either that or have them behind a few spell levels but with at will unlimited casting of every spell they know.

radthemad4 wrote:I don't know if they have a limit to spells per day. However, it usually takes them a while to learn new spells, and the more powerful spells tend to be harder. For the sake of balance, perhaps some sort of limit to spells per day should be put in. I think some sort of reflavored psionic power point using class would fit well enough. Either that or have them behind a few spell levels but with at will unlimited casting of every spell they know.

They don't have a per-day limit. Give them a WoF system.

Whether you think Harry Potter, Lina Inverse, or Merlin are sorcerers or wizards isn't all that relevant. The point is that they're bother drawing from the same spell list. There's no artificial divide that prevents Harry Potter's player from picking up the Dragon Slave, or Lina's player from casting Potter's signature spells. Maybe they have different power schedules, but the fact remains that we've got one master list of abilities for arcanists.

I'd just ask that the same thing be done for martial characters as well. Instead of locking one character as dumb brute, you should allow them to advance. So maybe Krusk the barbarian starts out as being the typical melee-only raging axe-swinger, but as he levels up wants to become more like Conan, where he can sneak around and ambush people. So he takes sneak attack and some stealth abilities too. Then later he wants to get some ranged potential so he can pick up archery. And the default martial class should allow all that without worrying about having a special class to role protect thieves, raging barbarians or elven archers.

Cyberzombie wrote:Whether you think Harry Potter, Lina Inverse, or Merlin are sorcerers or wizards isn't all that relevant. The point is that they're bother drawing from the same spell list. There's no artificial divide that prevents Harry Potter's player from picking up the Dragon Slave, or Lina's player from casting Potter's signature spells. Maybe they have different power schedules, but the fact remains that we've got one master list of abilities for arcanists.

I'd just ask that the same thing be done for martial characters as well. Instead of locking one character as dumb brute, you should allow them to advance. So maybe Krusk the barbarian starts out as being the typical melee-only raging axe-swinger, but as he levels up wants to become more like Conan, where he can sneak around and ambush people. So he takes sneak attack and some stealth abilities too. Then later he wants to get some ranged potential so he can pick up archery. And the default martial class should allow all that without worrying about having a special class to role protect thieves, raging barbarians or elven archers.

Why stop there though? What if Krusk wants to pick up a little bit of magic too? He might want a protective spell against poison, or maybe a lightning bolt.

Why would you assume that Harry Potter, Lina Inverse, and Merlin should all be able to use each other's magic in the first place? Just because that's the way D&D has traditionally done it? I'm not saying that they should each have slightly different mechanics for the Patronus Charm, I'm saying some of them shouldn't get the Patronus Charm at all.

Otherwise, there's no point in having classes.

Yeah, I really cannot see at all how someone could mistake Harry Potter, Lina Inverse, and Merlin for having the same magic.

Do Lina Inverse and Harry Potter travel backwards through time?

Does Harry Potter shoot giant fireballs? Does Merlin?

Do Lina Inverse and Merlin fire a death spell? Use shapeshifting potions that require a part of the person, or take something out of someone's hand and put it in their own?

Those sure look like completely different ability sets to me. I mean, there isn't no overlap, but no one is claiming martials should have no overlap either.

Kaelik wrote:Do[es]...Harry Potter travel backwards through time?

Technically, yes, since you're counting magic items, but otherwise your point is taken.

Kaelik wrote:
Do Lina Inverse and Harry Potter travel backwards through time?
.

Harry does travel back in time. That's how Hermione takes extra classes.

That is not "travelling backward through time."

Fuck do all you harry potter nerds who remember an obscure item from book 3 and the one time Harry ever used it not know who Merlin is?

Like, the "Meetings are sorrowful but Partings are joyous." Merlin.

The guy who literally lives in a backwards direction such that he begins his life as an old man and ends it as a baby? It is pretty fucking unique, and I'm willing to bet not duplicated by Harry Potter or Lina Inverse.

Cyberzombie wrote:Whether you think Harry Potter, Lina Inverse, or Merlin are sorcerers or wizards isn't all that relevant. The point is that they're bother drawing from the same spell list.

Wat?

No. They don't fucking draw their spells from the same spell list. They have an almost completely non-overlapping list of spells and they use them completely differently.

Merlin specializes in divination and healing, while Lina and Harry have almost no talent in that area. Indeed, in Lina's universe those things are specifically called out as Astral Magic and White Magic respectively, and Lina Inverse is a Black Sorceress. Those spells specifically exist in Lina Inverse's universe, and they are specifically not on her fucking spell list.

Lina Inverse specializes in throwing around giant arrows and spheres of fire and ice. Those spells do not exist in Merlin's or Harry's idiom. At all. There is no spell that Harry Potter knows or can learn that will cause a fiery explosion that clears a room full of orcs. That is simply not on Harry's spell list.

Even when they do have spells that broadly do the same thing, the details are different. Harry Potter, Lina Inverse, Merlin, and Gandalf can all make a glowing ball of white light. They all know a spell that does that. But...

[img][/img]



Lina's light spell just... makes light. If she sends it into your face she could blind you with it or something, but it's just a light spell. If she wants to do more than that, she uses Flare, which is fire and perhaps more importantly a different spell. Gandalf channels the Light of Anor, which if he doesn't spend any mana on it just makes his staff glow so people can see. But if he spends more mana on it, he can create a zone that damages and frightens creatures of evil. Harry Potter's light spell is just light unless he physically exhausts himself - but if he does accept some drain it turns into a fucking spectral deer that protects him from attack spells.

"Light," "Patronus," and "Light of Anor" all serve the basic function of lighting up a dark room, but they are not the same spell. They are not from the same list, they hinge on different resource management systems, and they do different things.

Cyberzombie wrote:There's no artificial divide that prevents Harry Potter's player from picking up the Dragon Slave, or Lina's player from casting Potter's signature spells. Maybe they have different power schedules, but the fact remains that we've got one master list of abilities for arcanists.

Literally everything you said there is wrong. Harry Potter can't pick up Dragon Slave and even if he could he wouldn't have the spell points to cast it because he's on a Drain Schedule and not a Spell Points schedule.

-Username17

Wait, Harry's on a Drain schedule? I thought it was just the "running around dodging in an extended firefight without a proper exercise routine" and, in the case of the Patronus charm, "being surrounded by monsters that drain your will to live"