Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would you be fine with classes that you can't always play but are better than base classes?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jack Daniel" data-source="post: 9251690" data-attributes="member: 694"><p>That's more or less exactly how I treat nonhuman PCs <em>now</em>. I want them to be rare, so I gate them behind a random die-roll; but I don't want that rarity tied to ability scores, so I keep the two mechanics entirely separate.</p><p></p><p>Instead, at character creation, after rolling for ability scores but before rolling for starting cash, the player makes a "heritage roll" on 3d6, with a result of 3–13 indicating that the character must be human; 14+ opens up Common nonhuman types (e.g., dwarf fighter, elf fighter/magic-user); 15+ unlocks Uncommon options (humanoids, or demihumans in less stereotypical classes); 16+ for Rare types (monstrous humanoids, or demihumans that outright defy their stereotype like dwarf magic-user); 17+ for Exotic player characters (actual monsters); and 18 for Unique concepts (literally anything the player can conceive of, that I can manage to balance and somehow justify its having been transported into the setting).</p><p></p><p>The point of my having a mechanic like this is to enforce the aesthetic of a human-centric fantasy setting while also still allowing for the <em>possibility</em> of nonhuman or otherwise unusual player characters, but not leaving that possibility entirely up to the players (who often have that tendency to want to play something special or unique as a matter of course — which has the knock-on effect of rendering these kinds of characters neither special nor unique in the long run).</p><p></p><p>With respect to character classes specifically, I don't at all mind the concept of powerful classes balanced out by their rarity. (In fact, I do something a bit like that at my table. I don't gate off any classes with stiff minimum ability score requirements; instead, I make sure that the classes I want to be rarer have multiple prime requisite ability scores.) But I do prefer to avoid having a system of rare and powerful subclasses which are selectable at level 1, like you see in AD&D, because I dislike the unbounded <em>proliferation</em> of classes. Instead, I prefer a small, tight list of playable classes, and any subclasses that differentiate them further must be attained at high levels and through largely diegetic means. (This is one of the reasons that I tend to prefer BECMI over AD&D).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jack Daniel, post: 9251690, member: 694"] That's more or less exactly how I treat nonhuman PCs [I]now[/I]. I want them to be rare, so I gate them behind a random die-roll; but I don't want that rarity tied to ability scores, so I keep the two mechanics entirely separate. Instead, at character creation, after rolling for ability scores but before rolling for starting cash, the player makes a "heritage roll" on 3d6, with a result of 3–13 indicating that the character must be human; 14+ opens up Common nonhuman types (e.g., dwarf fighter, elf fighter/magic-user); 15+ unlocks Uncommon options (humanoids, or demihumans in less stereotypical classes); 16+ for Rare types (monstrous humanoids, or demihumans that outright defy their stereotype like dwarf magic-user); 17+ for Exotic player characters (actual monsters); and 18 for Unique concepts (literally anything the player can conceive of, that I can manage to balance and somehow justify its having been transported into the setting). The point of my having a mechanic like this is to enforce the aesthetic of a human-centric fantasy setting while also still allowing for the [I]possibility[/I] of nonhuman or otherwise unusual player characters, but not leaving that possibility entirely up to the players (who often have that tendency to want to play something special or unique as a matter of course — which has the knock-on effect of rendering these kinds of characters neither special nor unique in the long run). With respect to character classes specifically, I don't at all mind the concept of powerful classes balanced out by their rarity. (In fact, I do something a bit like that at my table. I don't gate off any classes with stiff minimum ability score requirements; instead, I make sure that the classes I want to be rarer have multiple prime requisite ability scores.) But I do prefer to avoid having a system of rare and powerful subclasses which are selectable at level 1, like you see in AD&D, because I dislike the unbounded [I]proliferation[/I] of classes. Instead, I prefer a small, tight list of playable classes, and any subclasses that differentiate them further must be attained at high levels and through largely diegetic means. (This is one of the reasons that I tend to prefer BECMI over AD&D). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would you be fine with classes that you can't always play but are better than base classes?
Top