Ever used the UA Generic Classes?

[RFisher]

I haven't used them yet. I probably will if I ever choose to run d20 again. I like the idea behind True20, but I think I want to keep it more D&Dish when choosing what to simplify.

 

[Wombat]

Haven't used them.

After reading both rules sets, however, I would be much more likely to go with True20 than the Generic Classes.

As with most ideas in UA, I found equivalent material in another work done much better.

 

[Boss]

We have not used them to date in any of our campaigns, but the one I am developing now will use them, though the spellcaster is heavily modified (spell point system, no divine/arcane difference, new magic system involving use of arcane gems for focus). I look at it as a way to allow the players more leeway in how their characters work/appear, and an easier way to get to the large number of prestige classes available throughout the campaign world.

 

[Doug McCrae]

The concept's great but unfortunately the execution's lousy. The skill guy (expert) doesn't have enough skill points.

 

[GreatLemur]

After reading both rules sets, however, I would be much more likely to go with True20 than the Generic Classes.

Oh, yeah. True20's implementation of the idea is definitely a lot better. Giving every (generic) character class a feat at every level, and rolling all class abilities into the feat system--spellcasting included--is just a hell of a lot more elegant. Ending the whole class/cross-class skill distinction is also pretty obviously correct. There are admittedly some parts of True20 that I'd like to D&D up a little, but its generic class system is completely brilliant.

 

[jdrakeh]

I've owned and read True 20, but I have to be honest -- I think I like the way that UA handles the generic classes better (if only because it maintains some level of niche protection, which I've come to find is a large part of what makes D&D. . er. . D&D). And, of course (as I mention elsewhere), the powers system of True20 is not to my liking when it comes to emulating D&D-esque magic.

 

[RFisher]

(spell point system, no divine/arcane difference, new magic system involving use of arcane gems for focus)

Of course, the thing I keep forgetting about the UA Spellcaster is that it pretty much does eliminate the arcane/divine difference. All Spellcasters acquire & cast spells as sorcerers. Whether arcane or divine, they have access to all the Cleric, Druid, & Sorcerer/Wizard spells. The only mechanical impact of the arcane/divine choice is what ability score governs their spellcasting. & that's easy enough to house-rule.

I've been wondering if the UA spell point system is any good. I don't see any reason it wouldn't work with the generic Spellcaster.

Giving every (generic) character class a feat at every level

I've considered that.

I'm also considering dropping the Expert class & upping the skill points for the other two classes. (As discussed recently in another thread.)

 

[GlassJaw]

Yes - Grim Tales, my preferred chargen system.