Delinking role with class

[Markn]

So this is post 666 for me. Thought I'd throw something blasphemous out there to see what people thought.

I've had some recent threads about delinking ability score to class and how I would redesign the feat system. Next up - Roles and classes.

As it stands in 4e, and to some degree in previous editions, every class has had a predefined role. Fighters have generally been defenders, rogues have generally been strikers. HP's have been one way to express the role that a class has. Strikers have always had less (think rogue), defenders have always had more (think fighters).

Could an edition of D&D exist where you could choose your role and based on that role, get allocated HPs and aslo have a different subset of class abilities? For example, a defender rogue would be similar in HPs to a fighter (meaning more than the standard rogue) while a controller rogue would have less HPs than the standard rogue. As for abilities a controller rogue may not get a Sneak Attack ability but instead get something else that allows him to target multiple enemies while a fighter rogue would get a different version of marking.

My thinking is that it could be, either as a Class option chosen at the beginning of character creation or as chosen feats during character advancement - for example as a Controller I Feat, Controller II Feat, Controller III feat which would be duplicated for all other roles.

Could it be done? Would it feel right? What are the challenges to this? Does this take away from the flavor of the classes? Does it effectively replace multiclassing? Would it be good for the game?

 

[Oni]

I think the basic idea is spectacular, though I'm not sure what would actually be a good way to implement it. But if you decoupled role from class, but had a way to mix and match them you would have a huge amount of variety with a fairly small mix of classes. Heavy Fighter as leader, controller, striker and defender could cover such a huge swath of concepts for instance.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Complicated

And balancing would be a nightmare.

But if you were to try this, the simplest thing would be to get rid of class from the beginning, and set up "packs" of abilities that could be chosen.

Something like the hybrid system in 4E would work, linking Armors, hit points and such to which "pack" of abilities is chosen.

In my 4E game, we do a gestalt-like system where each player chooses two classes and mixes them together. It adds a lot of good variety.

But in all honesty, this is something for a game design company to do when designing their own game. Retrofitting is more difficult, I would say.

 

[FireLance]

I think the best way to do this would be to have some kind of modular system for stats and abilities.

For example, a defender role would give some high hit points, more healing surges and some kind of marking ability.

The key question is: what would you see coming in from the class side of the character? Once you extract out the role elements from a class, what is left? In other words, how would a defender rogue differ from a fighter apart from flavor and a few cosmetic changes?

 

[pawsplay]

Fantasy Craft does some interesting things. Class still equals role, but the trappings are different based on your Specialty. For instance, Soldier is a class, so Soldiers can use a variety of weapons and are good in armor. But your Specialty could be Fighter, Ranger, or even Rogue. In Fantasy Craft, class is basically role + feats + bonuses + maybe some unique resources. Your profession or archetype comes from your Specialty and use of feats. In other words, "the guy in front who dishes and takes out damage" is probably a Soldier by class, but his archetype could be anything, from Barbarian to Fencer to Swindler.

I'm not sure Role is, by itself, an adequate replacement of the concept of class. First of all, it would homogenize characters within roles. In a related fashion, it would also pigeonhole characters more distinctly into roles, even if their archetype includes one or two elements normally associated with another role.

If Role is "what," class is pretty much "how," and I don't think you have a complete concept without both.

 

[Markn]

I think the best way to do this would be to have some kind of modular system for stats and abilities.

For example, a defender role would give some high hit points, more healing surges and some kind of marking ability.

The key question is: what would you see coming in from the class side of the character? Once you extract out the role elements from a class, what is left? In other words, how would a defender rogue differ from a fighter apart from flavor and a few cosmetic changes?

The idea that the defender role would give high hit points, more healing surges and a marking ability is along the lines of how I think it would need to be done.

You've also hit the nail on the head in that if you extract those components from the class, how do you make the class unique or as you put it "what's left".

I think the strengths and weaknesses (benefits and limitations if you will) of each class would have to remain in the sense that, a rogue for example, is limited to certain weapons and armor regardless of chosen role. Then you would need to explore how you make up the shortcomings to be able to fill the role. Perhaps a defender rogue would get double the dex bonus to AC (to pump up the AC to defender territory), perhaps the rogue defender, while still stuck with a limited repertoire of weapons, can do unique things that the fighter can't do in terms of manuevers or effects/conditions he can apply. In other words, take the strengths of each class and go further with them and this would differentiate the classes. Sure, its mostly flavor, but the mechanics would support it and really, its not all that much different than what we have now - the only difference is that we accept the standard class configurations we have now because we have come to accept them as the default.

The other thing I would mention, and this idea is still very rough in my mind at this point, is that I also picture a possibility where there are different levels (feats perhaps) that allow you to be better in that role. So, you could have a Controller I feat, Controller II feat, etc. Each would let you alter your powers/attacks in different methods. Over time, you could focus in one role ore "multiclass" if you will, into a variety, without having all the tricks of the person who specializes in one role. Could be an interesting concept.

Edit - I also think the modular system is pretty much what we have now. WotC made sure, that for the most part, it matched what existed in previous editions for existing classes like fighter, wizard, etc, but as they break new ground with new classes, they use the original classes as a basis or balancing point for new material giving equivalent HPs, AC, etc.

 

[N0Man]

I think taking hybrid builds, and maybe tweaking them a little bit and reflavoring them might be a more reasonable way of accomplishing this.

For example, maybe take a rogue and a fighter, mix them together, maybe tweak it a little bit and create a basis for a swashbuckler defender type.

 

[amysrevenge]

For example, a defender rogue would be similar in HPs to a fighter (meaning more than the standard rogue) while a controller rogue would have less HPs than the standard rogue.

I think you'd get better mileage by divorcing the archetype you want to play from the name (and the fluff text, to a degree) of the class whose mechanics you are choosing.

If you want to play a "defender rogue" then play a Fighter, get training in Thievery and/or Stealth, and call yourself a rogue (but not a Rogue, if you catch the capital-letter-based distinction).

This has always been a difficult distinction for some people to see. "You say you're a rogue, but your character sheet says "Fighter". You're not a Rogue!"

 

[N0Man]

I think you'd get better mileage by divorcing the archetype you want to play from the name (and the fluff text, to a degree) of the class whose mechanics you are choosing.

If you want to play a "defender rogue" then play a Fighter, get training in Thievery and/or Stealth, and call yourself a rogue (but not a Rogue, if you catch the capital-letter-based distinction).

This has always been a difficult distinction for some people to see. "You say you're a rogue, but your character sheet says "Fighter". You're not a Rogue!"

That's certainly fair and one thing I considered as well, though the swashbuckler really isn't about the stealth and thievery aspects of a rogue, but more about the showy and flashy combat moves, fancy footwork, and
other things that I was envisioning borrowing from a rogue.

I haven't sat down and tried it either way, so there's probably more than way to accomplish it.

 

[cattoy]

short answer: play another game system. There are plenty of point-build game systems with no classes or roles.