Homebrew Race/Class rules.

Hi all,

Long time lurker 1st time poster - great forum! Thought I would ask you guys about an idea I am having since I am starting a 4th ed D&D campaign and want to implement the following. Tell me if you think its overly harsh...


Race/Class Exp Modifiers


RACES

The following races are considered "commonplace" and as such receive (+ 5% exp gain modifier) Humans, Elves, Dwarves.

The following races are considered "uncommon" and as such receive (0% exp gain modifier) Gnomes, Halflings, Half Elves, Half Orcs.

The following races are considered "rare" and as such receive (-5% exp gain modifier) Teifling, Eladrin, Dragonborn.

The following races are considered "oddities" and receive (-10% exp gain modifier) Shifters, Wilden, Deva, Goliath, Githraezi, Minotaur.

The following are not playable races - Drow, Changeling, Genesi, Warforged, Shardmind.

CLASSES

The following classes are considered "common" and receive (0% exp modifier) Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue.

The following classes are considered "uncommon" and as such receive (-5% exp gain modifier) Paladin, Ranger, Druid, Bard, Sorcerer.

All other 4e classes receieve a (-10% exp gain modifier) Warden, Warlock, Warlord, Shaman, Swordmage, Seeker, Runepriest, Psion, Invoker, Monk, Battlemind, Assasin, Artificer, Ardent

Now the logic here on races is that there are disadvantages to trying to "get along" in society and at large as a minority race in this game world. As far as classes goes the logic is that many of the less common class types require more work / training / discipline to advance.

Mainly I dont want to seem too punative but one thing this hopefully will accomplish is to eliminate the 5 PCs of wildly different origin who have no comminality / backstory syndrome. I know the exp penalty can get staggering by later lvls but I dont really have plans to leave heroic tier. My main question I guess is: Should I simlpy seek to add incentives in some areas of race and class to promote fitting in with the campaign setting? Does the exp penalties as stated seem too harsh? I mentioned it to some other people and they about flipped. Thoughts?

XP penalties are NOT the way to go; they're a pain to remember, and even if they aren't unduly punitive, they can feel that way.

If you don't want people playing certain races in your campaign, well... just tell them not to. Done and done.

If I want to play a Deva Shaman, that's 25% difference in XP compared to the Human Wizard. I wouldn't do this. It's not fun to have a PC who is behind others in levels. May as well not allow certain races/classes.

If you want incentives, do it with treasure. If you are one of the more favored races or classes, you start with a level 2 magic item. If you are less favored, you start with a level 1. If you are not favored, you start with two healing potions.

This would be a gap that closes very quickly, and wouldn't cause long term problems.

If diverse backgrounds are a problem for you, it may be best to sit down with the players and explain to them that their backgrounds need to be coordinated.

A group consisting of a Wilden Avenger, a Goliath Warden, a Shifter Druid, and an Deva Shaman could be a perfectly coherent nature themed group. You say elves are common in the game, so you could start them in an elven establishment, tied to the temple of Corellon. The Wilden as a follower of Corellon could easily have made this his home. The Goliath was perhaps bested by an elf in a friendly duel, and felt he had to learn more about the elves so he wouldn't fall for their tricks again, and as a warden was able to ease his way into a guardian position at the temple of Corellon. The Shifter is perhaps a liaison between the elves and their moonhowling neighbors. And the Deva was "born" to the temple of Correlon, a sign of difficult times to come. The Avenger could have easily forged bonds with the Warden and the Shaman, and the Shaman perhaps sees the Druid as an asset for the times ahead.

I don't think artificial limitations to class and race will accomplish your goal. A common sense talk with the players should be much more effective.

I'm with the peanut gallery here: in a system like 4e, where your level is such a huge factor on how effective you are, xp adjustments cause problems.

I'd find another way to encourage the play of common types vs. rare types. Rather than applying mechanical penalties, I'd impose a combination of roleplaying issues (not quite problems, but issues) and some "party restrictions":

-No more than 4 non-common choices in the party at a time;
-No more than 1 rare race and 1 rare class in the party at a time;
-No more than 2 uncommon races and 2 uncommon classes in the party at a time;
-For every 5 pcs you run, you may have only 1 rare choice and 3 uncommon choices, total.

When I say "choice" I mean "race or class", so for every 5 pcs you run, you may have one rare race or class.

(N.B. I run a game where pc death is not infrequent, so these are real limits in my campaign. If your pcs never die, my last suggestion is moot.)

Agreeing with the others. Thought I'd post something I'd noticed:

Like Siberys said, these can be hard to remember. And even if they are remembered, it slows down the game with math. Plus, who wants to spend time doing the math that is just a penalty for their character? Most people would call this a double punishment. These rules would be no fun...

I don't really understand why being a member of a rare race would inhibit your learning either, and I don't think I could be convinced. However, I like Jester's idea of common (favored) races having better starting goods, and rare (unfavored) races having less. This is easy to explain: those races are simply fairing better in the world. They have access to natural resources or favorable trade routes. Therefore, the race is more wealthy, and the average person from that race has more.

Build a bit of the world for your players before they build their characters. Tell them why it is more advantageous to be one race than another, and they should get the idea. If someone doesn't go along with it, they're probably not interested in min-maxing, which should be fine. If you go with Jester's idea, the player can still satisfy his/herself with the character they really want, take a small penalty in the toys he or she receives, and continue the game as normal.

I'll add my voice to those suggesting that this is not a good idea.

I'd say let them play what they like, and then work with them to create a cool, coherent backstory that fits in all of their characters.

Or outright ban certain classes and races if you don't want them in your game.

But don't do the XP penalty thing.

The commonality of races can also be addressed from a setting/RPG perspective. In addition to simply banning some races you prefer not to see in the setting, you could create RP penalties for the more common races. For example, if a race is very uncommon, it is likely to face at least some degree of prejudice. So, when they want to buy something it costs 5% more; when they want to sell something, the merchant gives them 5% less than he would another race. Diplomacy and insight are harder. If you are from a different, rare culture you are less likely to be able to negotiate and convince others, so you have an automatic penalty to your diplomacy. In addition, you will not necessarily understand the foreign environment and culture, so you have a penalty to insight.

These are just suggestions, but they provide a more subtle means of dealing with race issues in a setting without creating a EXP penalty.

With regard to class, I have found that the players quickly learn that too many rare classes can create an unbalanced party. So, that may correct itself after a few adventures.

Just my 2 cents.

docsid said:

The commonality of races can also be addressed from a setting/RPG perspective. In addition to simply banning some races you prefer not to see in the setting, you could create RP penalties for the more common races. For example, if a race is very uncommon, it is likely to face at least some degree of prejudice. So, when they want to buy something it costs 5% more; when they want to sell something, the merchant gives them 5% less than he would another race. Diplomacy and insight are harder. If you are from a different, rare culture you are less likely to be able to negotiate and convince others, so you have an automatic penalty to your diplomacy. In addition, you will not necessarily understand the foreign environment and culture, so you have a penalty to insight.

These are just suggestions, but they provide a more subtle means of dealing with race issues in a setting without creating a EXP penalty.

With regard to class, I have found that the players quickly learn that too many rare classes can create an unbalanced party. So, that may correct itself after a few adventures.

Just my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

I second this as well as saying that perhaps the real rarities, since they come from a different culture, have not got common as a language. They have to have someone to translate and even better they can be part of a backstory/involved by making them the translators.