Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Making the classes more generic
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 8049266" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>Play GURPS. Why bother with reinventing the core structure of a game if you don't like it? Class-based and class-less are fundamentally different games.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your idea is not that different from <strong>alternate class features</strong>. By offering options to replace some of the fixed class abilities, you free the class from the assumption that all members have them. Although so far WotC has shown willingness to offer only ONE alternative to each replaceable class ability (and seems more often concerned with replacing the mechanic without changing the concept), it is the easiest way to work towards your purpose.</p><p></p><p>For <strong>Rangers</strong>, the usual idea is wanting to make them non-magical, but I am not a fan. I think they are a key distinguishing feature from other martial classes. No Ranger magic means it's almost just a wilderness warrior or a rage-less barbarian.</p><p></p><p>For <strong>Paladins</strong>, two possibilities that would not jeopardize the core "LG-ish warrior-saint" nature of the class would be to remove the healing abilities (freeing the class from its support duties), or to remove the smiting abilities (opening up less combat-oriented concepts), but the latter might be difficult to pull off. Again many people want non-magical Paladins but that just makes them goody-good fighters.</p><p></p><p>Wildshape could be removed from <strong>Druids</strong>. Notice that it is already significantly diminished in 5e to being mostly for scouting, so it is much less invasive and limiting that it was in previous editions. But it can be removed completely for sure.</p><p></p><p>Your mention of <strong>Fighter's </strong>heavy armor is interesting... yes sure not every Fighter uses heavy armor, but did you notice that armors are designed so that it (almost) doesn't matter which category you choose? If your Fighter has low dex and chooses heavy armor she gets at most base AC 18; if she has mid dex and chooses medium armor she gets AC 17; if the she has high dex and chooses light armor she gets max AC 17. So there is really a maximum deviation of 1 in case of full plate (with that ~1k higher price tag, which may or may not be a big deal depending on the game). Thus for a specific Fighter that <em>doesn't </em>have good Dex, the armor proficiencies can be a big deal, but from the point of view of the whole population of Fighters, it doesn't justify granting a bonus to a Fighter that gives up heavy or even medium armor prof. The way it is designed <em>already</em> takes into account the concept of a lightly/medium armored Fighter. What it <em>doesn't</em> take into account is a completely armor-less fighter! In which case, you might want to consider granting something equivalent to the barbarian's and monk's Unarmored Defense.</p><p></p><p>That could also apply for example to <strong>Clerics</strong>, why not eschewing armor proficiencies in exchange for a sort of holy Unarmored Defense, and be a robe-wearing priest?</p><p></p><p>I agree on <strong>Rogues</strong>, Thieves' Tools could be optional (the obvious replacement is any other tool proficiency) and Thieves' Cant I honestly can't explain why it was made a base class feature rather than a Thief subclass feature, as it is even more narrow... I would just replace it with any other language proficiency.</p><p></p><p><strong>Monk </strong>basic abilities could be easily replaced in terms of mechanics, but in concept? They are after all fairly generic: attack, defense, movement. I can imagine someone would want to open up for a "slow, less mobile, more sturdy" Monk. Well maybe, but one problem is that Martial Arts and secondarily Flurry of Blows are designed to let the Monk keep up with other melee warriors, so they are hard to remove, although I would like a shuriken-based more ranged Monk option.</p><p></p><p><strong>Bard </strong>is the most difficult of all, because it's characterized by a lot of features together... you can maybe remove each one, but if you remove too many at once it's not a Bard anymore. </p><p></p><p>In addition to your list, I would like to explore the possibility of a <strong>Wizard </strong>without a Spellbook. It may not even make that much of a difference, but it would remove a capability and a limitation at the same time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 8049266, member: 1465"] Play GURPS. Why bother with reinventing the core structure of a game if you don't like it? Class-based and class-less are fundamentally different games. Your idea is not that different from [B]alternate class features[/B]. By offering options to replace some of the fixed class abilities, you free the class from the assumption that all members have them. Although so far WotC has shown willingness to offer only ONE alternative to each replaceable class ability (and seems more often concerned with replacing the mechanic without changing the concept), it is the easiest way to work towards your purpose. For [B]Rangers[/B], the usual idea is wanting to make them non-magical, but I am not a fan. I think they are a key distinguishing feature from other martial classes. No Ranger magic means it's almost just a wilderness warrior or a rage-less barbarian. For [B]Paladins[/B], two possibilities that would not jeopardize the core "LG-ish warrior-saint" nature of the class would be to remove the healing abilities (freeing the class from its support duties), or to remove the smiting abilities (opening up less combat-oriented concepts), but the latter might be difficult to pull off. Again many people want non-magical Paladins but that just makes them goody-good fighters. Wildshape could be removed from [B]Druids[/B]. Notice that it is already significantly diminished in 5e to being mostly for scouting, so it is much less invasive and limiting that it was in previous editions. But it can be removed completely for sure. Your mention of [B]Fighter's [/B]heavy armor is interesting... yes sure not every Fighter uses heavy armor, but did you notice that armors are designed so that it (almost) doesn't matter which category you choose? If your Fighter has low dex and chooses heavy armor she gets at most base AC 18; if she has mid dex and chooses medium armor she gets AC 17; if the she has high dex and chooses light armor she gets max AC 17. So there is really a maximum deviation of 1 in case of full plate (with that ~1k higher price tag, which may or may not be a big deal depending on the game). Thus for a specific Fighter that [I]doesn't [/I]have good Dex, the armor proficiencies can be a big deal, but from the point of view of the whole population of Fighters, it doesn't justify granting a bonus to a Fighter that gives up heavy or even medium armor prof. The way it is designed [I]already[/I] takes into account the concept of a lightly/medium armored Fighter. What it [I]doesn't[/I] take into account is a completely armor-less fighter! In which case, you might want to consider granting something equivalent to the barbarian's and monk's Unarmored Defense. That could also apply for example to [B]Clerics[/B], why not eschewing armor proficiencies in exchange for a sort of holy Unarmored Defense, and be a robe-wearing priest? I agree on [B]Rogues[/B], Thieves' Tools could be optional (the obvious replacement is any other tool proficiency) and Thieves' Cant I honestly can't explain why it was made a base class feature rather than a Thief subclass feature, as it is even more narrow... I would just replace it with any other language proficiency. [B]Monk [/B]basic abilities could be easily replaced in terms of mechanics, but in concept? They are after all fairly generic: attack, defense, movement. I can imagine someone would want to open up for a "slow, less mobile, more sturdy" Monk. Well maybe, but one problem is that Martial Arts and secondarily Flurry of Blows are designed to let the Monk keep up with other melee warriors, so they are hard to remove, although I would like a shuriken-based more ranged Monk option. [B]Bard [/B]is the most difficult of all, because it's characterized by a lot of features together... you can maybe remove each one, but if you remove too many at once it's not a Bard anymore. In addition to your list, I would like to explore the possibility of a [B]Wizard [/B]without a Spellbook. It may not even make that much of a difference, but it would remove a capability and a limitation at the same time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Making the classes more generic
Top