Justification for favored classes... Is there any?

[Remathilis]

This is my take...

In the dark days of D&D, there were level limits. And they were bad. However, each race had a class it could gain the most levels in. In 2e (the one I know by heart), a races "favored" class was the one it could gain either 15th or Unlimited levels in. In 1e/2e, it was as such.

Dwarf: Fighter
Elf: Mage
Halfling: Thief
Gnome: Illusionist
Half-elf: Bard
Half-orc: Assassin (later, fighter)
Human: Any class (their "special benefit")

Also, if you looked at the Multi-class combinations, you'd note that these classes were the ones most commonly listed in multi-class combos. Of course, exceptions abounded. Half-elf couldn't mix bard with anything (until the Complete Bard's Handbook), but could mix almost all thier other classes together. Gnomes too, could mix any two of thier classes together. However, this coupled with the level limit debacle, ment you saw alot more dwarf fighters, elf mages (or fighter/mages), and halfling thieves than other combonations.

Flash foward to 3e. The favored class mechanic comes from this "racial preference" concept originally enforced with multi-classing combos and level limits. Since neither are going to exist, the designers, rathers than leave preference to the slaughter, enforced them in the form of favored classes.

dwarves, elves, halflings and gnomes all got their traditional classes (since 1e), humans got any, to represent the dual-classing rules, half-elves also got any, to represent the sheer number of multi-class combos they once had, and half-orcs got barbarian a.) because assassin was a PrC and fighter was already used b.) to highlight this new class and c.) further the archetype of the raging savage orc.

I personally see no problem with them. They keep PC's from wantonly picking out "kewl" levels, and I wave them when it is story appropriate (like the elf fighter 7 who became devout and began taking levels of paladin). It also seems to be one of the few things half-elves get over thier parent elves. It also enforces the traditional archetypes and racial norms without arbitarilty restricting them. Lastly, I've yet to hear anyone in my games complain about them (there is already enough whinning about item creation and PrCs, I don't think I could TAKE any on FC).

As a last thought, many "optional" races (like sub-races and monsters) have other classes as FC. Aasimar have paladin, wood-elves favor ranger, drow favor cleric, merfolk favor bard, etc. Their is even a race in If Thoughts Could Kill that has Psion as a FC. If its a giant hassle, rule-0 it, but I personally don't mind them.

 

[Dr. NRG]

The only effect the favored classes really seem to have is to make humans and half-elves slightly more powerful, but I don't see that it is needed to maintain balance.

Judging by the number of half-elves I've seen in 3E (none), more needs to be done to improve balance for them, not less. Other than flavor, what other reason would people have to play them instead of playing an elf?

I really believe it's all about game balance. I never played in a 2E game that enforced level limits, and I saw a whole lot of demihumans in 2E. I rarely saw humans, though. In 3E, due largely to favored classes, bonus skills, and that all-important early bonus feat, humans are a realistic (and common)choice again. I think this is a more realistic scenario, as many campaign setting are composed primarily of humans.

NRG

 

[smetzger]

Not much justification. Its supposed to encourage racial stereotypes and put some limitations on multi-classing. I don't think it does either particularly well. It can even be detrimental to balance. For example a Half-Elf Fighter 7/Ranger 1/Wizard 1 gets _no_ XP penalties, but a Fighter 4/Ranger 4/Wizard 1 gets XP penalties.

Assuming you want to accomplish the above, there should be a better ways. Here are some suggestions:
1) require the race to take at least one level in one or more classes. No XP penalties for multi-class level disparities.

2) Have a list of Unfavored classes for each race. You get a 10% XP penalty if you are of this class and you multi-class.

You could do either 1 or 2 or both. Both options are more restricting than the Favored Class rule but they will do a much better job of accomplishing the goals.

 

[Desdichado]

I've never enforced that rule. Lately, I'd prefer to play with an even more generic class system, like d20 Modern tweaked for "traditional" fantasy anyway. The favored classes, and even the classes as they are constructed now, while much more free than they have been in past editions, didn't go far enough in allowing player flexibility to realize personal character concepts through the class mechanic. You either have to accept what the PHB tells you the viable character concepts are (unacceptable), multiclass (acceptable, but the favored class mechanic starts to grate if your concept requires signifncant multiclassing to develop), do away with multiclassing penalities (acceptable) or tweak the actual class rules (subject to GM approval, potential balance issues and non-support from electronic resources, to name just a few potential drawbacks.)

 

[Bendris Noulg]

I've re-written them to be more setting specific. Like SL, a few get a choice (although the choice is made when you take the 1st Level of either one, not at creation). Normally, the choice can't be changed, although I have one race that has a choice between Rogue and Shaman that may switch to Shaman later because training for Shaman is generally reserved for "aged" members of the tribe. In this case, Rogue would remain the Favored until the Shaman levels were raised above it.

I don't use the XP Penalty; Rather, I give +1 Skill Point for gaining levels in the Favored Class. I do this mostly because my group and I believe that in-game events should effect class selection at level up which, more often than not, promotes uneven multiclassing. For instance, a PC with FC Fighter is an ECL8/Fighter4/Rogue2. He joins a military company and begins gaining levels of Soldier (a homebrew class that focuses on group tactics and formation combat). In game, this is logical and believable within the context of the developing storyline. Metagame, however, it would screw the PC with a penalty.

Obviously, the penalty had to take a hike.

 

[Dragongirl]

I would rather see a least favored class(es) where the XP penalty only applies to the proscribed classes.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Interesting thoughts folks. Though the whole idea turns me off, here's another alternate thought:

Each class could have two (or one) favored races.


thoughts?

 

[MerakSpielman]

Hm. Just thought of the problem with that. As it is, the mechanic allows other, races, like MM races, to have favored classes. If we did my idea, the PHB class descriptions would have to list all the monster races they favor.

 

[Sagan Darkside]

Each class could have two (or one) favored races.

Maybe I am a bit slow tonight, but how would that be any different?

SD

 

[I'm A Banana]

I've rationalized it like this:

--There are certain 'natural tendancies' for the race. This represents skills they pick up very easily in comparison to others, things they don't have to work as hard at. Sort of like paths that they would naturally follow if they didn't choose to do otherwise. The easiest groove sort of thing. Their natural tendancies.

--Because each species has these natural grooves, they can devote energy into it that isn't as easily expended. They can stick in a few levels, and still not be inhibited in any other area. They can pick up a bit here or there, without suffering much in their overall skill.

--Humans and half-elves, due to their racial versatility, consider whatever class they've put the most energy into their easiest groove. They can pick up levels of any other class no problem, becuase diversity is part of what they do.

It's sort of a thing because mutliclassing is so easy, the designers wanted to make sure it didn't get too obscene when stereotypes were something to be encouraged (a dwarven rogue who takes a few levels in cleric isn't following the easiest path, for instance).

Changing it at character creation doesn't hurt mechanics at all. Completely ignoring it hurts humans and half-elves a little. But, truly, ability score bonuses and racial qualities enhance the ability for each race to adapt a certain class anyway, so favored classes are largely just one more way to enhance this image. I mean, who would be a halfling or gnomish monk when a human monk of the same level is more powerful? With a penalty to Strength, and no bonuses to Dex, why would you try to be a gnomish warrior at all? Halflings are veritably made for roguishness. Elves are iffy -- many of their powers don't naturally bleed into wizardness (though only those who use simple weapons only get any benefit from the enhanced weapon abilities). They'd make good rogues if it wasn't for the Con penalty (OUCH! basically knocks down rogue HP to wizard levels anyway). Dwarves make perfect armored tanks. Humans and Half-elves, due to their lack of ability score adjustments, easily fit into any avenue.

So don't let it hurt creativity, but keep in mind that you should maybe give humans and half-elves a little bump to compensate if you take it away (nothing large...maybe an extra skill as a class skill at 1st level, or something)