Help me with my homebrew classes.

[Chris Lawrence]

I've been working on an expanded list of base classes for my homebrew and have a basic idea of what I want. However, I've made the new classes mostly by stripping class features away from standard classes and I now need to think about what class features to give the new/modified classes to balance them out and give them the right flavour. I'll list the classes below. Any advice on what abilities to give the new classes would be much appreciated.

Priests

• All characters, but especially priests, can get divine help by praying and/or sacrificing to the gods.
• The standard cleric class will be available to all cultures.
• There will also be a ‘spell-focused cleric’ (need a better name), available to all cultures, who has d4 HD, no armour proficiency and only simple weapons proficiency. This class also has the bad, rather than the moderate BAB progression. The idea is that this is a priest who has chosen to focus entirely on divine magic, eschewing physical combat.
• The standard monk class, renamed ‘warrior monk,’ exists only for the sauroid culture.
• For humanoid and goblinoid societies, there will be a totally different ‘monk,’ who will have no martial arts/Asian fighting skills, a d4 HD, the bad BAB progression chart and no spells. This kind of priest fights a deeper battle against the enemies of the gods than would be possible with mere magic or steel. Knowledge, ritual and prayer are the main weapons in the monk’s battle against the ungodly. He or she spends all day studying or in prayer, and lives in austere seclusion. These monks have excellent turning ability and are better than any other class at obtaining divine favour through prayer and sacrifice. This class is intended to be primarily an NPC class, but I want them to be quite powerful within their niche.
• Paladins are as in the PHB, but receive no spells and don’t get a Paladin mount. These guys are monks who spend much of their time in prayer, but unlike regular monks, they take it to the enemy with cold steel and spend their time training instead of studying.

Druids & Rangers

• The standard druid & ranger classes will be available only to elves and the fey. The classes will be renamed ‘fey druid’ and ‘fey ranger.’ The only change will be that the fey ranger must select the archery combat style.
• All other cultures will have a druid and a ranger class that represent characters who are not so closely tied to the forest as are the elves and fey. These druids and rangers are definitely nature-oriented, but are also comfortable dealing with and even living in civilized villages and towns.
• The (non-fey) ranger will have no spells, no animal companion and will automatically get the archery combat style. This class represents the classic medieval woodsman/huntsman.
• The (non-fey) druid will have no animal companion, no wildshape and no thousand faces ability. This class is essentially a priest of nature, protecting nature but also mediating between the natural world and the civilised world.

Sorcerers and Wizards

• Sorcerers get no familiar, but otherwise are just as they are in the PHB.
• Wizards get no familiar and use a strict Vancean magic system. It’s fire and forget and multiple ‘copies’ of the same spell cannot be memorised.

 

[Turanil]

-- Paladins without mount and spells, could get a feat at each level when the standard paladin gains access to a new spell level.
-- Rangers without spells could get d10 or even d12 HD. Or you could replace them with the Scout class from Complete Adventurer.
-- For the npc "goblinoid focused special monk/cleric" class, why not use the Warlock class? If not having Complete Arcane and no intent buying it, you can find some Warlock variants on the Internet (I know there is a good thread about such classes on the WotC D&D forums).
-- Sorcerers and Wizards could get the Bardic Knowledge ability (but related to magical stuff onl) instead of familiars.

 

[Chris Lawrence]

-- Paladins without mount and spells, could get a feat at each level when the standard paladin gains access to a new spell level.
-- Rangers without spells could get d10 or even d12 HD. Or you could replace them with the Scout class from Complete Adventurer.
-- For the npc "goblinoid focused special monk/cleric" class, why not use the Warlock class? If not having Complete Arcane and no intent buying it, you can find some Warlock variants on the Internet (I know there is a good thread about such classes on the WotC D&D forums).
-- Sorcerers and Wizards could get the Bardic Knowledge ability (but related to magical stuff onl) instead of familiars.

Great ideas. Thanks Turanil!

I also posted this on rpg.net, where some others suggested the scout class. Unfortunately, I don't have Complete Adventurer. Could you give me a brief overview of the scout as a class?

 

[Turanil]

I haven't the book, and don't remember quite well what this class is like. But it's more rogue than warrior however. Anyway, from what I have read, Complete Adventurer is considered the best of the Complete books. At least you could get a look at it in a local gaming store. A far as alternate rangers are considered, I remember that the last DM i played with, did let me swap ranger spells for Sneak Attack (gaining 1d6 each time a new level of spell would have be gained otherwise). Nonetheless, I thought tht this houserule was somewhat overpowered. Yet, you could have it usable only with archery and in the outdoors while hunting some creature to tone down this idea.

 

[Vrecknidj]

I like what you've chosen to do with druids and rangers. This is an excellent idea for enhancing flavor in a campaign. Do you allow half-elves? Can half-elves become fey rangers?

Could a half-elf raised by elves qualify, or is there too much non-elven blood?

I also like the spell-focused cleric. But, in order for this class to be playable, the players have to treat it much like a wizard. If this character is going to also be the party's healer, then it might get kinda boring for that player (DM: What do you do on this turn, Player: Wait, again, for someone to get hurt so I can heal). I'd probably do something beyond just add an extra domain, or more domain spells. I might even expand the spell list so that this character has something to add during combat.

I don't like the idea of a wizard not being able to have multiple copies of a spell; it's very limiting and significantly weakens the class. On the other hand, if enemies are also significantly different from the standard game, it could work.

Dave

 

[Chris Lawrence]

Thanks for the feedback Dave.

I like what you've chosen to do with druids and rangers. This is an excellent idea for enhancing flavor in a campaign. Do you allow half-elves? Can half-elves become fey rangers?

Could a half-elf raised by elves qualify, or is there too much non-elven blood?

I'm envisioning the restriction as primarily a cultural one, so that half-elves raised by elves would be able to take the class, as would the occasional non-elven/fey character who has chosen, once and for all, to turn his or her back on world of farms, towns and cities (perhaps suffering a very slight penalty for not having any fey blood in them).

I also like the spell-focused cleric. But, in order for this class to be playable, the players have to treat it much like a wizard. If this character is going to also be the party's healer, then it might get kinda boring for that player (DM: What do you do on this turn, Player: Wait, again, for someone to get hurt so I can heal). I'd probably do something beyond just add an extra domain, or more domain spells. I might even expand the spell list so that this character has something to add during combat.

Good point. I hadn't considered the possible healing vs. utility conflict. Maybe I could give the spell-focused cleric lay on hands and take away access to the healing domain. Perhaps then the healing domain could be replaced by an arcane domain appropriate to the cleric's diety, thus granting a bit more fire-power in a fight.

I don't like the idea of a wizard not being able to have multiple copies of a spell; it's very limiting and significantly weakens the class. On the other hand, if enemies are also significantly different from the standard game, it could work.
Dave

So far, nobody has liked this idea.

I made this change partially to be consistent with the in-game explanation for Vancean magic that I've chosen, but mostly to encourage players to take advantage of new spell flexibility that I'm introducing. Basically, I'm trying to make sure that each spell has about five different uses above and beyond those listed in the PHB, thus greatly increasing the flexibility of any given spell. For example, create water can do its normal job, but it can also be used to heal a water elemental, to wound a fire elemental, to soak an ally as slight protection against fire, to soak an enemy to make him or her more vulnerable to the effects of cold, to put out a flame or small fire (e.g. a torch or a companion on fire), and to function as a weak version of grease. I'm hoping that by limiting wizards to one copy of each spell, they'll have to take advantage of the new flexibility to oversome their enemies in more creative ways.

Still, if the players don't like the strict fire-and-forget, then I'll scrap it.