Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Classes (and races and themes) with stacking limits
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="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5830798" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>Warning: Extremely ivory tower musing herein.</p><p> </p><p>Various versions of D&D have discouraged various powergaming combos via stacking limits. One of the more obvious ones is the explicit bonus types that don't stack in 3E. Another is the similar but scaled down "item" or "feat" bonuses not stacking in 4E. You can also think of the 3E/4E item "slots" as a similar mechanic, albeit with a different slant. Up until now, most such restrictions have been on relatively small pieces of mechanics--a particular modifier or weapon proficiences, for example.</p><p> </p><p><strong>What if instead stacking limits were applied on larger pieces--major chunks of abilities from class, race, theme, etc?</strong></p><p> </p><p>For example, consider a fighter/ranger multiclass. Whatever else a fighter or ranger gets, they both get considerable combat ability. Under a non-stacking system, you'd pick one or the other (probably as a one-time thing). The "combat package" from each does not stack--the +N to hit, bonus damage, any maneuvers, etc.</p><p> </p><p>Doesn't that leave a lot on the table for some beloved and obvious combinations, though? Yep, that's why each class needs several of these major chunks of abilities. A straight ranger might have combat, woodlore, and even some magic (for starters). When you play such a character, maybe you get to pick two. If you multiclass into ranger, you can pick one to add to what you already have. If you already have combat, you'll probably pick one of the other ones.</p><p> </p><p>The real benefit of this approach, however, is how it interacts with races, themes, or any other organization scheme you care to use (paragon paths, guild membership, etc.) None of these stack. So you give elves their own version of woodlore. An elf taking ranger is now different than a human fighter multiclassing into ranger for woodlore, because the elf already has it.</p><p> </p><p>So where does increased power come in, then? From levels, and only levels. That is, as a character levels up, whatever abilities they have, from whatever source, are eligible to become more powerful. Presumably, you'd get some picks at each level, where you could choose to enhance an existing "chunk" or add a new one. (Perhaps adding a whole new class or theme is more costly than adding a new capability from an existing race, class, or theme.)</p><p> </p><p>Finally, this means you can actually get pretty restrictive with which classes get access to certain capabilities. For example, let's say you want to lump "sailing" under fighters or "thieving" totally under rogues. That's ok now, because anyone can pay the cost, add the needed class, and pick up exactly that chunk. So the design can simply put abilities where they make the most sense for the majority (or even plurality) of cases, and forget about it. </p><p> </p><p>Might not be anything to this, but I've been thinking a lot lately about the inherent conflict between levels being mainly about power, in a game that wants to be "additive" with class, race, theme, etc, but the stacking of those things tends to increase power.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5830798, member: 54877"] Warning: Extremely ivory tower musing herein. Various versions of D&D have discouraged various powergaming combos via stacking limits. One of the more obvious ones is the explicit bonus types that don't stack in 3E. Another is the similar but scaled down "item" or "feat" bonuses not stacking in 4E. You can also think of the 3E/4E item "slots" as a similar mechanic, albeit with a different slant. Up until now, most such restrictions have been on relatively small pieces of mechanics--a particular modifier or weapon proficiences, for example. [B]What if instead stacking limits were applied on larger pieces--major chunks of abilities from class, race, theme, etc?[/B] For example, consider a fighter/ranger multiclass. Whatever else a fighter or ranger gets, they both get considerable combat ability. Under a non-stacking system, you'd pick one or the other (probably as a one-time thing). The "combat package" from each does not stack--the +N to hit, bonus damage, any maneuvers, etc. Doesn't that leave a lot on the table for some beloved and obvious combinations, though? Yep, that's why each class needs several of these major chunks of abilities. A straight ranger might have combat, woodlore, and even some magic (for starters). When you play such a character, maybe you get to pick two. If you multiclass into ranger, you can pick one to add to what you already have. If you already have combat, you'll probably pick one of the other ones. The real benefit of this approach, however, is how it interacts with races, themes, or any other organization scheme you care to use (paragon paths, guild membership, etc.) None of these stack. So you give elves their own version of woodlore. An elf taking ranger is now different than a human fighter multiclassing into ranger for woodlore, because the elf already has it. So where does increased power come in, then? From levels, and only levels. That is, as a character levels up, whatever abilities they have, from whatever source, are eligible to become more powerful. Presumably, you'd get some picks at each level, where you could choose to enhance an existing "chunk" or add a new one. (Perhaps adding a whole new class or theme is more costly than adding a new capability from an existing race, class, or theme.) Finally, this means you can actually get pretty restrictive with which classes get access to certain capabilities. For example, let's say you want to lump "sailing" under fighters or "thieving" totally under rogues. That's ok now, because anyone can pay the cost, add the needed class, and pick up exactly that chunk. So the design can simply put abilities where they make the most sense for the majority (or even plurality) of cases, and forget about it. Might not be anything to this, but I've been thinking a lot lately about the inherent conflict between levels being mainly about power, in a game that wants to be "additive" with class, race, theme, etc, but the stacking of those things tends to increase power. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Classes (and races and themes) with stacking limits
Top