3.5, core classes forbidden

[Particle_Man]

I just finished playing a 7th-level "no core classes or races" online campaign going through White Plume Mountain, and it was great fun. My character was a changeling warlock, and we also had a catfolk ninja, a half-orc wu jen, and a half-giant psychic warrior.

Um...half-orc is a core race.

 

[MarkB]

Um...half-orc is a core race.

Good point. I can't remember now whether he was an exception to the rules, or if we were allowed to take core races but the rest of us just went with more unusual choices. Core classes were definitely disallowed.

 

[Robert Ranting]

Shortly after Complete Adventurer came out and finished the 4 "basic" complete books, I had suggested something along this line. A three-hour discussion with another gamer yielded a setting built around the idea that the core 3.5 classes did not exist, and only those in the first 4 Complete books and the Expanded Psionics HB did.

Unfortunately, the other guy wasn't willing or interested in seeking my further input, and so the project folded.


Ah well.

Btw, one suggestion I made that was rejected in the above scenario is to include the Races Of...books and the Terrain series...this yields lots of new races like the Uldra, Asherati, Bhuka, Goliath, Raptorans, and Illumians, who definately make for a different world "feel".

Just my two cents.

Robert Ranting

 

[Varianor Abroad]

re: new base classes

Spellthief (enhanced in some way, it's a cool class but kinda weak)

I prefer the Gutter Mage from Book of Roguish Luck, by Wolfgang Baur. They get a ton of flavorful abilities and can steal spells at 10th level.

The results of this will be interesting. Are you banning core feats too?

 

[Agent Oracle]

I don't think you have any classes with 8+ skill points/lvl, only a couple of 6+ skill points, which might be irksome.

Scouts get 8

 

[Barak]

I really don't see how not having turn undead is that huge a deal, really, assuming the DM keeps it in mind, anyway, and doesn't stock adventures with "extra" undeads to suck 'em up. It's not like a lack of healing, trap detecting, or damage dealing, which would -really- be a problem.

 

[MarkB]

I don't think you have any classes with 8+ skill points/lvl, only a couple of 6+ skill points, which might be irksome.

Beguilers get 6, but they're INT-based casters, so they don't lack for bonus skill points, and they cover the same range of skills as rogues.

On the other hand, they also benefit from the same skill-set as standard spellcasters, so you still run into some hard choices.

 

[Len]

I really don't see how not having turn undead is that huge a deal, really, assuming the DM keeps it in mind, anyway, and doesn't stock adventures with "extra" undeads to suck 'em up. It's not like a lack of healing, trap detecting, or damage dealing, which would -really- be a problem.

I agree. If you can't turn 'em, hit 'em. Turn undead is sometimes helpful, occasionally very helpful, and usually wasted (or used for other purposes, like Divine Spell Power). Lack of turn undead will not be a big problem in a non-core campaign.

 

[Particle_Man]

If you are going non-core, you might want to limit things further. You have to decide whether or not psionics will be allowed, and you have to decide if you want the more "Far Eastern flavored" classes (ninja, samurai, wu jen, shukenja), and you have to decide if you like Incarnum or not (and its associated classes), as well as the wuxia-esque Tome of Battle classes and the "alternate magic classes" in the Tome of Magic.

Or you could just allow absolutely all of them.

 

[Nifft]

I think Psionics are a better replacement for magic than most other stuff -- Psionics have restoration, ways to raise the dead, and other nice things. They're not as strong in this regard as Clerics, but at least they can get the job done.

-- N