Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AFGNCAAP" data-source="post: 1408704" data-attributes="member: 871">Hello,I'm currently working on 2 settings that will use the Generic Classes from UA instead of the standard PHB core classes.  I've been doing a bit of brainstorming/designing,& I was wondering if I could get a bit of opinions/comments/feedback on some of the general ideas/concepts/etc. that I'm working on.Generic NPC Classes: Now, with the use of the generic PC classes, what are some feasible options for NPCs in such a system?  I'm not sure that the Warrior NPC class, Expert NPC class, and Adept NPC class would work well with the generic classes--actually, just using the generic PC classes for any NPCs who'd fall into these categories would work just fine, I'd think.However, there are 2 NPC classes that I'm not too sure about: the Commoner & the Aristocrat.  Commoners have no good saves, poor BAB, d4 Hit Die, a skill point base of 2, and only has proficiency with 1 simple weapon.  However, he has 10 class skills.  The Aristocrat is sort of a mix between an PC Warrior & a PC Expert: d8 Hit Die, a skill point base of 4, 1 good save (Will), proficiency with all simple & martial weapons, proficient with all armor & shields, & 17 class skills.(Note that the # of class skills is higher since they're fixed--there probably would be fewer class skills if the DM/PC were allowed to pick & choose what skills are class skills for the classes [sort of like with the Expert NPC class, with just any 10 skills as class skills].)So, should there be NPC generic classes (to cover characters such as landed nobility & common folk)?  If so, how would you work them out?Generic Psionics: Well, the Spellcaster's a good way to account for any sort of spellcaster (arcane or divine) using the Generic Classes, but what about psionics?  Would they just be another form of Spellcaster (basically switching out spells with psychic powers)?Then again, would there really be any point in having something like this (due to the spontaneous nature of the Spellcaster class)?Expanding the Spellcaster: As for the spellcaster class itself, how would you work other options for the method of spellcasting?  For example, what if you want to have spellcasters prepare their spells ahead of time (like a cleric or wizard)?  Would you drop the "spells known" limit for the spellcaster, but have them pray for spells ahead of time or keep a spellbook?How about specialist spellcasters, or domain spellcasters?  Would you keep the bonus abilities granted by cleric domains (lilke +1 caster level, making certain skills class skills, free feats, etc.)?  Would they be more like the Wizard Domains from UA, granting 1 additional known spell/level?Generic Prestige: Okay, though things could be kept really simple by only allowing the generic classes, I think that Prestige Classes made for use with the generic classes could expand the options available to these characters; PrCs could also cover unique setting-specific characters (like the Red Wizards & Purple Dragons do for FR).Also, some PrCs for the generic classes could cover class abilities/concepts that could not be recreated with the generic classes, like a raging barbarian, a monastic unarmed combat master, etc.  These PrCs could be major, 15-level PrCs like the Paladin, Ranger, & Bard as presented in UA, simple 5-level PrCs that cover a basic concept, or even a typical 10-level PrC much like the typical PrCs in D&D or the Advanced Classes in d20 Modern.Well, what do you think?  Any ideas/opinions/comments on the matter?</blockquote>

Verification