Expanded Core new industry standard?

[Nellisir]

Somewhat off-topic, it would have been nice if the prestige class concept had been worked in better with classes. Something like having tiers of classes, so that base classes were just low level classes, and at level 7 or 10 you began a new class in a new tier - prestige classes. Everyone would do this, so the balance point would be easier to find.

One of the 3e tweaks I was working on before I switched to S&W as instituting tiers (0: Commoner, 1-4:Adventurer, 5-9: Hero, 10-14: Champion, 15-19: Legend, 20: Paragon) and Aspects. Aspects were a cross between prestige classes and...I dunno. Races. You had a core class, and then chose aspects that refined that class. A first level character could be an Elven Fighter, or a Barbarian Fighter. Later, the elf could become a High Elven Fighter, or an Elven Soldier (Fighter). The Barbarian could settle down and become a Soldier, or go wilder and become a Berserker. Multiclassing would be essentially the same, so you could even have a Barbarian Fighter/Magic-User, with "barbarian" themed spells and magical abilities.

 

[Firos]

Tiers, what a great idea. But we'd need a new name. We couldn't call them prestige. Oh, I know how about Paragon.

Wait.

I think somebody else already did that.

and that.

Yeah, yeah, I like 4E too. But what I'm talking about would go further than anything like a paragon path. In a 4E context, each class would only have 10 levels. A number of them, like fighter, sorcerer, wizard, cleric, rogue and such would have levels 1 to 10. Then, when you enter paragon tier, you choose a new class; but not one of the previous, as there is a whole new set of paragon classes to choose from. Each of these classes would have 10 levels, but they would all be set to begin at the level 11 power point, and have abilities commensurate with that advancement.

It would be a bit like keeping prestige classes, but excising the mechanical requirements, and forcing everyone to take one. In essence, you are working the balance of the prestige classes in from the beginning.

The second idea, of course, is a bit more like 4E, but it might be better to have lots and lots of short classes or character paths that merely link abilities thematically, type damage, and fill certain character niches. It would be like generic classes from Unearthed Arcana (3E) but instead of dull, unbalanced classes, you would have a very few kinds of base advancement, and then layer the "classes" on top of those. The classes become flavour and arrangement, but then the arrangement doesn't become a game of GURPS.

Not that GURPS is necessarily a bad game; I think it is dull, though.

 

[Mark]

You should know by now how we operate - we take one word and turn it into an entire sinister, paranoid worldview. Tsk, tsk, rookie mistake.

"Operate?" As in genetically engineering your own legion of gamers so that anything I ever want to buy will already be soldout? I thought as much!

 

[Nellisir]

The second idea, of course, is a bit more like 4E, but it might be better to have lots and lots of short classes or character paths that merely link abilities thematically, type damage, and fill certain character niches. It would be like generic classes from Unearthed Arcana (3E) but instead of dull, unbalanced classes, you would have a very few kinds of base advancement, and then layer the "classes" on top of those. The classes become flavour and arrangement, but then the arrangement doesn't become a game of GURPS..

That's exactly what I was working on. Each Aspect (class) had Basic, Advanced, and Expert features; after 5 levels you had 3 basic, 2 advanced, and 1 expert feature.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

New base classes for Pathfinder = excellent!

 

[CapnZapp]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Mona
Here's a tidbit unrevealed elsewhere.

We decided the next four core classes for Pathfinder today. As in the whole staff agreed on the conceptual and mechanical niches and we've officially green-lit development.

And we'll announce which ones at Gen Con!

--Erik

Eh... well, I'm categorically opposed to the proliferation of core classes, so I can't say I'm exactly excited by this.
__________________________________________________
In the Pathfinder 1st printing sell out thread, Mr. Mona dropped the above tidbit about an annoucement at GenCon of the next Core Classes.

So, expanded Core is now an industry standard it seems.

Do we have strong feelings on this..either way?

RK

Hmmm... I think you have it backwards.

In our business, there is only one big player. D&D is everything.

So whatever WotC does, can be called an "industry standard" regardless of how other companies do. Whether Paizo or White Wolf etc starts to use a practice or not should have no bearing on whether it gets to be called an "industry standard" - that company simply is too small to merit such a label.

 

[Dykstrav]

Just like other words, such as level, really.

This is reasonably amusing.

Wasn't it the 1E DMG where there was a paragraph explaining the different meanings of the word, and they decided to just use level repeatedly because they thought it would be too confusing to use different terms? If I remember correctly, they wanted to call character level "rank," monster level "order," and spell level "power."