Core Class Craziness--What's Next?

[Desdichado]

As far as I'm concerned, the d20 market has self-corrected this problem though. For people like me who want classes that fit a different flavor, they're relatively easy to find. My Quick and Dirty campaign resource for players includes three basic D&D classes (barbarian, fighter, rogue), two Midnight classes (Defender, Wildlander), a Path of the Sword class (hunter), a Rokugan class (courier), and a modified Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed class (unfettered.)

For other flavor options, I've got more choices yet. For higher (yet different) magic, I've got the Sovereign Stone and the original Elements of Magic document (or even the Rokugan options, and the AU options.) But these are mostly d20 options, not D&D options. I haven't been very impressed with most of the alternate base classes in WotC books. Hopefully Unearthed Arcana does a better job of it.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

nb if I wanted to create a swashbuckler character from 1st level I'd choose a fighter with 13+ Int, Dex as high as I can make it, weapon finesse, expertise (and subsequently get improved disarm, dodge, mobility, spring attack etc) while using a rapier and wearing a chain shirt.

I'd quite probably agree with my DM that this swashbuckler has his weapon proficiencies limited (perhaps to the bard list or the rogue list?) and loses his Medium and Heavy armour proficiency, while gaining tumble.

He'd be able to go a long way and have lots of fun as a swashbuckler with no additional rules or new class needed.

That wouldn't work very well, however - you won't be doing much damage, and that is part of a fighter's role, you won't have the skills you want (eg Tumble is not a fighter class skill), and you won't get acrobatic charge, either. Personally I think feats could help solve this problem.

D20 Modern solved this problem quite well: a Fast/Strong combo with Melee Smash won't do as much a straight Strong character but you will still be competitive and your BAB won't suck too much. Plus you get a class bonus to Defense!

 

[diaglo]

i like 3 core classes.

Fighting Man
Magic-user
and Cleric

 

[EricNoah]

I think I like core classes better than prestige classes, in actual play as a DM. The big difference to me is those darned prerequisites. Multiclassing into a couple of core classes takes no prerequisites and so it's easy to throw together a unique NPC that way, but trying to stat up a PrC character is a real pain.

I may go through my "favorite" PrCs and reduce the number of prerequisites -- maybe one feat, one skill, and BAB prereq for each, (plus spellcasting prereqs) and that would be that.

 

[Darklone]

i like 3 core classes.

Fighting Man
Magic-user
and Cleric

Diaglo, I think one of D&Ds worst crimes was the introduction of the cleric class to RPGs

 

[Nifft]

i like 3 core classes.

Fighting Man
Magic-user
and Cleric

Don't forget Halfling.

-- N

 

[diaglo]

Diaglo, I think one of D&Ds worst crimes was the introduction of the cleric class to RPGs

it definitely made alignment a sticky wicket

i think thief was the class that caused the most trouble.

the abilities of thieves should've been incorporated into races and left there.

any class can steal.

 

[diaglo]

Don't forget Halfling.-- N

but they were Hobbits man. and they could as PCs be Fighting Men.

Sheriffs....Welcome to Sherwood.

 

[Rackhir]

One subtle little effect of more core classes vs prestige classes, is it's effects on multiclassing. Prestige classes after all don't incur XP penalties if there are significant class level differences, but core classes do. So I wonder if this might be at least in part an attempt to resolve some of the complaints about char with multiple prestige classes.

 

[Plane Sailing]

That wouldn't work very well, however - you won't be doing much damage, and that is part of a fighter's role, you won't have the skills you want (eg Tumble is not a fighter class skill), and you won't get acrobatic charge, either. Personally I think feats could help solve this problem.

I'm not making my point clearly enough though... changing a class to incorporate tumble at the expense of something else is *entirely covered within the core rules*. Does everyone forget that *the core rules tell you that you can do this kind of thing*? It certainly seems as if everyone does!

I don't buy the argument that "a fighter has to cause lots of damage all the time". If a fighter wants to use a rapier, that is a perfectly viable option. A swashbuckling fighter could end up finessing his rapier with greater weapon focus and greater weapon specialisation, power attacking for extra damage with his improved critical (or keen weapon). He could easily be wearing bracers of armour and a ring of deflection alongside his Dex to give him a high AC. Such a character might naturally want to take a duellist prestige class if such was available, but to say that any fighter isn't worth his salt unless he uses a two handed sword and wears plate armour is ludicrous (I know that is not what wizardru is saying, but taking his argument that a fighter is "supposed to dish out the damage" to its logical conclusion leads there. A rapier is only 1pt less than a longsword on average, which used to be *the* typical fighter weapon (although you'd be hard pressed to find one in use nowadays I'd wager!)

Cheers