dwarf as a class

[delericho]

While I prefer a race/class split too, it weakens your credibility when you get the history wrong.

Sorry, I should have said, "When I moved from BECMI to 2nd Edition"!

I didn't play 1st, hence my jump.

 

[erf_beto]

(Now, if instead they're offering a fairly generic bunch of powers, and your 'class' is nothing more than selecting this bunch of powers instead of 'that' bunch of powers, then a pre-gen 'Dwarf' class makes sense - it's just one of many builds. But that essentially makes D&D classless, which seems like such a major departure as to be almost unthinkable.)

I think this is probably right. But I don't think it will make DnD classless though.

 

[Reynard]

You mean, like: "open book, play dragonborn" ?

Fus Ro DAH!

Yes, you could do much worse than "Open book, play Dovahkin."

 

[DEFCON 1]

Finally, if the core conflates race and class, this means that when people move on, it isn't just a matter of adding new options - they have to unpick their characters to make sense under the new paradigm. To gain a tiny benefit in complexity at the outset, you're adding a significant amount of complexity later.

It's not "core". It's "basic". The point being... you don't move on from Dwarf (class) to Dwarf Rogue with the same character. Your character is a Dwarf (class) for as long as you play him until such time as you decide to create a new character. At that point you can create another Fighter (class), Halfling (class), Cleric (class) etc... or you decide to crack open the Race & Class module and start creating an Elf Cleric, Gnome Wizard, or Human Paladin etc.

I would imagine it would basically just say at the start of character creation section "Here are seven pre-gens if you want them, but if you want more customizability, read the next chapter on Races & Classes". I have no idea why some many people are adverse to this, because like I said above... 3E had the exact same thing with each class having a "pre-built" character in its chapter that you could use and I don't remember folks getting so worked up about their presence (except maybe because of the loss of "word count" that could have been spent elsewhere, but those folks were few and far between.)

 

[Reynard]

It's not "core". It's "basic". The point being... you don't move on from Dwarf (class) to Dwarf Rogue with the same character. Your character is a Dwarf (class) for as long as you play him until such time as you decide to create a new character. At that point you can create another Fighter (class), Halfling (class), Cleric (class) etc... or you decide to crack open the Race & Class module and start creating an Elf Cleric, Gnome Wizard, or Human Paladin etc.

I would imagine it would basically just says at the start of character creation section "Here are seven pre-gens if you want them, but if you want more customizability, read the next chapter on Races & Classes". I have no idea why some many people are adverse to this (because like I said above... 3E had the exact same thing with each class having a "pre-built" character in its chapter that you could use.)

They could do a lot worse than looking at Labyrinth Lord and the Advanced Edition Companion for a way to get it done right.

 

[delericho]

It's not "core". It's "basic". The point being... you don't move on from Dwarf (class) to Dwarf Rogue with the same character. Your character is a Dwarf (class) for as long as you play him until such time as you decide to create a new character.

Two things:

You are, of course, assuming that this is the case. We don't yet know how this will work.

It's not unlikely that a player will want to move on from something as basic as "dwarf is a class" pretty quickly. If he's locked into that for the lifespan of his character, that could well mean several months of being stuck with a character he doesn't like. It seems much more likely that the "races and classes" module will allow for character rebuilds (even if no other modules do this).

I have no idea why some many people are adverse to this, because like I said above... 3E had the exact same thing with each class having a "pre-built" character in its chapter that you could use

3e only had those characters at 1st level. What you did with them after that was up to you. Likewise, the 4e builds covered a slightly longer level range, but it was still clear that you could step off the build any time you chose. That doesn't seem to be the implication here - once you choose "dwarf as a class", that's you locked in to the path from them on.

It may also be worth noting that both the 3e pregens and the 4e builds were pretty quickly exposed as being rather poor choices. Sure, they made for valid characters in a pinch, but certainly weren't great. I have no problem with them providing sample builds for new players, but not if they're going to do a poor job of it.

 

[DEFCON 1]

It's not unlikely that a player will want to move on from something as basic as "dwarf is a class" pretty quickly. If he's locked into that for the lifespan of his character, that could well mean several months of being stuck with a character he doesn't like. It seems much more likely that the "races and classes" module will allow for character rebuilds (even if no other modules do this).

So the player just makes a new character. So what? Are you saying it's a mistake altogether to offer simpler character options to people just on the off-chance that a few of those players might want to try the advanced options later on? That's seems kind of short-sighted in my opinion.

There's room for the Essentials Fighter and the PH Fighter side-by-side in 4E. Why isn't there also room for it in the next game?

It may also be worth noting that both the 3e pregens and the 4e builds were pretty quickly exposed as being rather poor choices. Sure, they made for valid characters in a pinch, but certainly weren't great. I have no problem with them providing sample builds for new players, but not if they're going to do a poor job of it.

So your real issue is not that the rules might exist, but that you think they'll screw up implementing them. Well, that's different. I can certainly understand that.

 

[delericho]

So the player just makes a new character. So what? Are you saying it's a mistake altogether to offer simpler character options to people just on the off-chance that a few of those players might want to try the advanced options later on?

No, I'm saying this is the wrong place to do it. The existing race/class split is easy to understand - I've never had a player not grasp it immediately.

However, to move from "race as a class" to the full "races & classes module", one of two things must happen:

- The player can unpick his "dwarf as a class" out so it becomes a "Dwarf Fighter" under the new paradigm. In which case the game has made a marginal simplification at the outset, at the cost of a much greater complexity later. IMO, that is a bad trade-off.

Or, if the game doesn't allow that 'unpicking' of "dwarf as a class" to "Dwarf Fighter", or if doing that is just too much effort:

- The player just discards his character and builds a new one. IMO, that doesn't seem a good solution either - the player presumably likes his character, and is invested in him; he just wants the flexibility of the new mechanics.

There's room for the Essentials Fighter and the PH Fighter side-by-side in 4E. Why isn't there also room for it in the next game?

I'm not very familiar with Essentials, but my understanding was that the Essentials classes were little more than builds, and that the player could "step off the path" any time he wanted? At least, that was the argument I kept seeing put forward why Essentials wasn't a 4.5e. If it was not the case, that would be a mistake in Essentials.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't think Basic characters will be forced to change completely to upgrade in Advance ones. I expect to see Basically and Advanced classes to be able to multiclass. Buy back into Advanced classes might be possible too.

A Dwarf Dwarf/Fighter might not be out of the question.

 

[Gort]

I must say, I was always a fan of the themes they put into 4e that allowed you to swap out any powers you liked from your class with "race-themed" ones. So if you're playing a dwarf cleric, you might swap out your cure light wounds spell for "dwarven endurance" or some such power.

It was a nice way to make race more important.