Changing The Game By Limiting Class Choice

[Kaodi]

How do you think the game would change if the only classes that were allowed were the ones that did not gain full attack bonus or full spell progression? So, if the game were limited to Alchemist, Bard, Inquisitor, Monk, Rogue, and Summoner (and Ninja)(Edit: and Magus)?

With this there would be no radical differences in attack bonuses, and far fewer game breaking high level spells. Interestingly enough it would also create a game where heavy armour was rather rare for PCs until you reach a high enough level for a party magus to have that option.

As a player, do you think you could enjoy a game that had just those classes?

 

[BriarMonkey]

As a player, in a word, No.

I'd miss playing my barbarically inspired Half-Orc Fighter with their great axe; or my less-than-sane Half-Elvish Cleric; or my knowledge driven Wizard. There are some character ideas that just don't fit with the list you present.

Granted, there is nothing wrong with those classes, if I am in the mood to play my pyromantic Goblin Alchemist; or my womanizing Human Bard. But, out of all of those, there is no substitute for the Fighter or Barbarian. Or Paladin for that matter.

As GM, you must be very aware of the fact that as a whole the party will be much "softer". There won't be the big Fighter or Barbarian to soak up a lot of damage. That damage will be spread around much more freely to the less substantive others - which could make mortality a more frequent occurance.

And there too, mortality will be much more, well, permament. Restricted access to those higher level spells to bring back the dead means that the dead will pretty much just stay dead.

Honestly, if the higher level spells are an issue, then may haps use a system similar to E6 and go with E9 or E13 for instance. You still get to some of the better abilities, but won't ever have to worry about spells above 7th level.

 

[Crothian]

My current campaign (Council of Thieves) all the players choose classes with high skill points. So, we have a Ranger, Rogue, Bard, and Inquisitor. As a DM you need to be aware the strengths and limits of those classes the PCs are. Make sire the players are okay with the limits and then have fun. It really helps change the feel of the game and can enhance the experience especially if you played other campaigns with different class mixes.

 

[DDogwood]

How do you think the game would change if the only classes that were allowed were the ones that did not gain full attack bonus or full spell progression? So, if the game were limited to Alchemist, Bard, Inquisitor, Monk, Rogue, and Summoner (and Ninja)(Edit: and Magus)?

With this there would be no radical differences in attack bonuses, and far fewer game breaking high level spells. Interestingly enough it would also create a game where heavy armour was rather rare for PCs until you reach a high enough level for a party magus to have that option.

As a player, do you think you could enjoy a game that had just those classes?

I would enjoy this game. I don't agree that the full BAB classes are really a problem at any point in the game, so I'd be happier if you just cut out the full casters. But I think limiting class choice can make for a really interesting game, as it shakes players out of their usual expectations.

 

[Drathir]

i doubt id care. I'm good playing magus and inquistor (two of my favorite classes) but many could have a problem. It would also give me an excuse to play the monk (which in point buy is easily and with rolls is only good with 15+ stats for what 4 of them?) i guess it would depend on the campaign of course.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Sounds like a world dominated by Summoners instead of one dominated by clerics and wizards. Ho hum. They still get a bunch of powerful high level spells, they're just packaged in lower slots. And they still get to break the action economy.

Also not sure why you need to remove the full BAB classes.


I could certainly enjoy such a game, I'd probably just play a Viv. Alchemist or Magus, or maybe bard w/ the right archetype. I don't think it'd fix too much, though.

 

[Kaodi]

Sounds like a world dominated by Summoners instead of one dominated by clerics and wizards. Ho hum. They still get a bunch of powerful high level spells, they're just packaged in lower slots. And they still get to break the action economy.

I thought you might chime in to point them out, hehehe... I would probably be tempted to go the extra step of cutting them out as well.

Though there might be something to be said for a world dominated by NPC summoners, .

 

[Mad Hamish]

I'd be ok with it for an individual campaign but I wouldn't want to do it all the time.

I'm somewhat puzzled why you want to do away with the full BAB classes as I don't know that they dominate compared to the Magus, Inquitistor or Alchemist for instance (the biggest problem classes are IMO the Rogue and the Monk being underpowered rather than anything other than the full casters being overpowered)

I suspect that Summoners will be very powerful in the campaign and I also wonder if the reduced healing will cause issues (against that you could easily have a group where everybody has access to healing spells)

 

[Matthias]

It must be said that when the players in a gaming group pick out their classes and races, if their choices amount to a crazy hodgepodge of characters that make little sense, the GM is expected to run a campaign that not only finds a role for each character to play in the upcoming campaign, but contains challenges that do not take undue advantage of any niche weaknesses in the party.

Somewhere between GMs arbitrarily assigning each player's race and class for them, and each player picking any race and class combination out of any book (or even creating their own), there is a happy medium in which both players and the GM compromise yet retain enough freedom of choice that they can reasonably play a fun campaign together.

 

[gamerprinter]

While I wouldn't want to be limited all the time, I do like theme games, that is say the PC party are all members of a rogues guild, ranger brotherhood or other class specific organization. And it just could be that the supporting roles were by some classes and not all of them.

I see no problem with this kind of game as a one-off campaign - no problem as a GM or player.