Reworking Classes, Part I: Narrowing It Down

In an effort to simultaneously simplify the rules (tailoring them to the audience) and tweak their flavor (tailoring them to the campaign), I'm taking a hard look at the 3.x classes.

At a bare minimum, we need four: Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Mage (Wizard).

Ranger and Barbarian are going to get smushed together into the Dunewalker, an all-around desert guy who's 70% ranger and 30% barbarian. (More on him in a later post, of course). No inherent spells for the dunewalker, although they could multiclass a few levels of cleric to easily get the same feel. Now, I could certainly leave this guy out completely, if I wanted to go super bare-bones. But it's themey, and the two donating classes have their own special abilities which aren't replicated elsewhere.

Speaking of replicated elsewhere, what's a paladin? A fighter/cleric, or a cleric with certain feat and thematic choices. So that's that - no separate paladin necessary. Plus, this eliminates that pesky lingering alignment issue.

Bards, as written, don't go well with the setting. I'm leaving them out completely for now.

Same is true for Monks, I'm afraid. Plus...that class has some issues as written.

Sorcerors? I've always had a bit of a problem with 'em. I like my magicians old-school, I suppose, and that flavor suits the setting better. No sorcerors, either. (see, that was easy...)

Druids? These might be better reworked into either a) a beast-talking shapeshifter, b) an elemental spellcaster, or c) a leafshaping plant guy. As they stand, they're a bit of all three, and that's the problem I have with them. I think I can safely set druids aside for now...remember, I'm plotting a campaign for only three players.

And with only three players, what we're probably going to be looking at is a fighter-type, a rogue-type, and a caster. This isn't guaranteed, but it's a likely spread. If the players decide they want a fighter, a cleric, and a dunewalker, that's okay, too - the adventures will be tailored to them. Two clerics and a mage? Sure, why not. We might see some multiclassing along the way (I'm allowing multiclassing freely for this game), I don't expect to see it the first couple of levels.

Spreading all those thoughts out in front of us, we're looking at five classes. That's all. And isn't that enough for three players? I think so.

Now, looking at those five, there are some across-the-board tweaks that will have to apply. The first is the simplified skill system, and adjustments for that. Secondly, the cleric domain system needs work. I want the clerics in this setting to be different from each other, but I don't want the cleric player to have to keep separate track of domain spells, regular spells, and what have you. I'm thinking I'll prep a list of 'universal' spells, and then some lists of 'domain' spells - which will have a lot in common with the 2e 'spheres' system. Every cleric (PC or NPC) will have access to the universal spells, plus those of probably three spheres. This will keep them limited, but still different from one another. I'm all about handing the players what they need to play - and if that means I spend a little time compiling a "spells you can cast" document, so be it - I'm okay with that. I'd rather spend the time now than waste it later as a player desperately flips through several books looking for 'just the right spell'. Plus, if we end up with two cleric-casters at some point, I can easily mandate that their spheres not overlap, which will keep them differentiated.

I'm still trying to figure out what I want to do with the mage end of magic as far as 'schools' or 'elements' or 'astrology' or whatever. I know one thing: item creation feats are gone, gone, gone. I'm the DM - I can ad-hoc decide what the mage can and can't craft, and how long it takes him, and what weird ingredients he'll need (I smell a plot hook there). Just like we did back in the day. And, again, with only three players, we're looking at one, one and a half arcane casters max.

Mages, will, of course, still get the ability to scribe scrolls at first level - I'll just have to keep it reasonable as we go. Specialist wizards have gone the way of the dodo...if the player of the mage wants to 'specialize', then we'll do it via feat selection, roleplay, and questing for unusual spells.

Mages will also have the option at first level of either having a familiar, or having a staff (or other focus item) that can serve as an 'item familiar' and grow in power as they increase level.

Other than the skill system and the above-mentioned stuff, these four classes basically look like their PH/SRD equivalent. The rules & setting handout will have the first ten levels of each of these classes (plus the dunewalker and possible druid-substitution, when complete) printed in 'em, so the players have everything at hand when creating their characters, levelling up, or thinking about multiclassing.

I know that between reworked rules and all the setting fluff, it seems like a lot of stuff to be handing to the players, perhaps. But this isn't supplemental - it replaces their (nonexistent) Player's Handbook. Call me old-school, but I'm the DM - I'm the only one who needs the full byzantine rules at hand. They just need the basics and their sheets, period. No clutter!