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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ratskinner" data-source="post: 5861538" data-attributes="member: 6688937">There are plenty of folks who want to make _no_ mechanical character choices after picking a race, class, and theme. However, I think the core of this idea can work for both ends of the simple-complicated spectrum. Bear with me:True20 had 3 classes: Warrior, Adept (caster), and Expert (skillmonkey). Lets call these superclasses. Simple/basic classes would all be labeled as falling under one of these superclasses. Each Simple class is represented by a set of features that compose the class. If you are playing the Basic game, these features are predetermined and will level up as noted in the Simple class description. By having "hybrid" style multiclassing rules, you could  fit the other classes as well: i.e. Paladin and Cleric would both be a  Warrior-Adepts with different balances/selections of features from the divine Adept  stuff and the Warrior stuff. Even if that multiclassing is hidden from the player of the Basic Game who wouldn't even have to think about the Superclasses at all.When you introduce Barbarian in a straight up simple way for basic play, just note that it is a "Warrior" subclass. Features would come prepackaged in simple classes, but could be swapped to create complicated/diverse characters. The Advanced rules would provide the rules to swap mechanics within each superclass, and for creating superclass hybrid characters. Since there are only 4 superclass hybrids (AB, BC, AC, and ABC), a root for each combo (HD, BAB progression, etc.) could be specified directly.  Just a rough draft of course, I'm already guessing that there would be a need for differentiation between "Primary" and "Secondary" abilities. I know it sounds like a bit like 2e's skills and powers, but I think it could work if done right from the start, rather than attempting to reverse-engineer it.</blockquote>

Verification