Class concepts that you just can't work out neatly in DnD

[Crothian]

But feel free to explain why neither combat, magic nor adventure are important to D&D. I know you want to.

Why would I? I never made any claims like that. I think you might be reading too much into my comments.

 

[pawsplay]

If you make all options available to all classes, but give certain classes a "discount" on acquiring certain options, you'll keep the class system, but increase flexibility.

So, basically, Rolemaster. I still don't like it. Class systems have their limitations, but there are things they do really well, and once of those things is holding the gate against fiddling. To put it bluntly, no point based system is going to tell you what a monstrosity you've created when you've got a rogue variant who traded in a couple of skill points to get the ability to cast invisibility. As the ninja and spellthief demonstrate, it is a necessity to keep sneak attack dice and opportunities to use them in proportion to each other. If the spellthief had full sneak attack progression, then skill points and evasion or no, there would be few rogues left in the world.

As far as the "rumormonger" class goes... for it to be a reasonable choice, it would have to have something to do in an adventurous situation, whether that's intrigue at court or delving ancient tombs. It is not enough for a character to simply be good at something. The party is counting on each character being good, in general, not just good at a particular thing. A rumormonger is going to end up sitting on his hands a good deal of the time, and focuses primarily on activities (research and talking) that are frequently boring if played out. To get the class to even have a meaningful tactical level to play on, you would need advanced rules for contacts, intrigue, and information gathering. You'd also want to move to a variant XP system. Although it's hard to imagine how much XP such a character is going to earn the in context of walking around talking to people and looking stuff up. The only way for such a character to be interesting, to me, is for them to experience personal drama, which is far outside what D&D is intended to do. Seeing your village incincerated by a dragon, and being unable to do anything about it, escaping with your scrolls and reflecting on how paltry they are compared to human life, well that could be interesting, but it's not worth any XP for the half-orc fighter in the party.

In general, class and level systems are not at all well-suited for that kind of game, and you would be far better off with GURPS, or if you think you might actually be tempted to do something action-adventure-oriented, perhaps Hero.

In d&D, I would just find myself saying, "Look, you're a smart guy who is good at rumor mongering. Is there some really important reason you can't also be handy with a rapier in a dark alley, when push comes to shove?"

 

[TarionzCousin]

Ever want to play a character who studies magic and has a natural empathy for animals ... but doesn't want all the nature-lovin' baggage of a druid or ranger class? How about a paladin of a chaotic gawd?

How about a Bard that doesn't perform to help others with their skill checks? That sounds good to me. I'm sure there are some variants out there that do this; feel free to point them out if you want.

Personally, when I GM, I let my players adjust PrC's if they want to tailor the abilities more toward what they enjoy. I just keep a firm grip on what they switch so they can't custom-build an uber-monkey.

Edit: Regarding the bard, if you haven't seen this, you should. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0004.html

 

[Crothian]

So, basically, Rolemaster. I still don't like it. Class systems have their limitations, but there are things they do really well, and once of those things is holding the gate against fiddling. To put it bluntly, no point based system is going to tell you what a monstrosity you've created when you've got a rogue variant who traded in a couple of skill points to get the ability to cast invisibility

If there is a point system do we still have a DM? Because I'm pretty sure he can tell you that. And that is assuming the point system is so terribly done to allow such a thing in the first place.

 

[WayneLigon]

You're close. What I am saying is that D&D doesn't do games that are limited to courtly intrigue well because it is an adventure game. The game is limited. In order to do certain things with it, you have to change it. Which is fine and all. But don't ask for support for non-combat, non-magical, non-adventuring character archtypes and concepts ikn thre Core Rules.

But feel free to explain why neither combat, magic nor adventure are important to D&D. I know you want to.

I'm still at a loss as to why we need rules systems to 'support' non-high-adventure/Sword-and-sorcery style scenarios. D&D can perfectly well handle such things, within the core rules even; it handles them slightly better when you use some of the optional rules (such as the Urban ranger variant, or non-LG-paladin variants). Apparently you don't think so, but I'm here to tell you it does. I've played in many a D&D game where we never cast a spell or drew a sword.

 

[pawsplay]

If there is a point system do we still have a DM? Because I'm pretty sure he can tell you that. And that is assuming the point system is so terribly done to allow such a thing in the first place.

How much is the invisiblity spell worth to, say a necromancer with illusion as a prohibited school, versus a rogue? For the necromancer, he trades a number of spells for a bonus necromancy slot and a Spellcraft bonus. One spell is a paltry item... even the whole of 1st and 2nd level illusions spells is just one part of his potential arsenal that he has foregone for his specialization. The the rogue, however, invisibility means a virtually guaranteed sneak attack at least once each day.

How is a point system going to negotiate that? You speak as if a well designed point system is resistant to such problems. But even the best point based systems are vulnerable to synergies... periodically, the Hero System boards play games like coming up with the most damage you can do with 10 character points.

Even with as limited a customization as D&D currently has, "max damage at 1st level" and so forth can be very eye opening. Or how about the wizards.com Hulking Hurler, who can do around 25 million d6 damage or so at ECL 20?

Once you allow unlimited customization, niche flies out the window, warrior-mages lie down and cry, and organic character growth takes a back seat.

 

[Crothian]

Once you allow unlimited customization, niche flies out the window, warrior-mages lie down and cry, and organic character growth takes a back seat.

I'm not saying the system has to be perfect, just that a DM still be allowed to say no and alter things as he sees fit. It also helps to play with people with a similiar style to one's own. So, if one is worried about people abondoining nichts and abusing the system then one just has to not play with them.

 

[Cedric]

I'm not saying the system has to be perfect, just that a DM still be allowed to say no and alter things as he sees fit.

Agreed...it's not what you can manage to make the system do with a few loopholes and stacking of abilities. It's what the GM allows you to come to the table with.

 

[pawsplay]

Agreed...it's not what you can manage to make the system do with a few loopholes and stacking of abilities. It's what the GM allows you to come to the table with.

I like the footing I'm on when I play out of the D&D books in this regard.

I have a shelf full of other games, which I use to play other things.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If you make all options available to all classes, but give certain classes a "discount" on acquiring certain options, you'll keep the class system, but increase flexibility.

So, basically, Rolemaster.

Um, no.

What I described was not a point-based game, but just the current system with a slight twist.

To clarify:

Each PC would get more feats over time (probably still class and progression based).

In turn, a Feat like Power Attack would have a line (just below "Prerequisites) that says something like "Cost : 1 Feat slot for Good BAB classes; 2 Feat slots for Medium BAB classes; 4 Feat slots for Poor BAB classes."

In contrast, the corresponding line for a Feat like Craft Ring might read "Cost : 1 Feat slot for Full-spellcasting classes; 2 Feat slots for Low-spellcasting classes; 4 Feat slots for Non-Spellcasting classes."

To put it bluntly, no point based system is going to tell you what a monstrosity you've created when you've got a rogue variant who traded in a couple of skill points to get the ability to cast invisibility.

I must disagree, based upon my experience with the aforementioned 2Ed Players Option Rules and point-based games like HERO.

How much is the invisiblity spell worth to, say a necromancer with illusion as a prohibited school, versus a rogue? For the necromancer, he trades a number of spells for a bonus necromancy slot and a Spellcraft bonus. One spell is a paltry item... even the whole of 1st and 2nd level illusions spells is just one part of his potential arsenal that he has foregone for his specialization. The the rogue, however, invisibility means a virtually guaranteed sneak attack at least once each day.

How is a point system going to negotiate that?

First, as any experienced gamer knows, no system is immune to abuse.

Second, you talk about the rogue with invisibility as if the other PCs have not used the modified rules themselves. That invisibility may not be so powerful if the game also included a PC who can Detect Invisible at will...Or who has True Sight...or can...well, you get the picture.