Missing base class concepts (link?)

[JoeGKushner]

I think that what is mostly missing from the WotC base classes are classes w/o spell casting. I realize Iron Heroes handles this, but its a different system. A viable spell-less Scholar class would be interesting, as would a Charisma focused one. I realize such things wouldn't come up in most regular games, but then not all of the ones in the PHB come up either (we have never had a Barbarian PC in any game, nor even a major Barbarian NPC). Classes with supernatural abilites, but no spell casting, would be useful to. A skinwalker class that has a better wildshape than the druid, no spellcasting, and a better BAB and skills for example.

Check out Black Company and Thieves World. Both have a lot of non-spellcasting base classes like the Jack of All Trades, Scout, Ranger (with no spells), or even something like Grim Tales where all the d20 modern classes are worked up to 20th level.

 

[Cam Banks]

A "differently" focused rogue -- the mandatory sneak attack progression slants them towards combat; alternatives would be nice.

A scholar class.

Some kind of "noble/warrior".

Dragonlance introduced 4 new core classes to D&D, although two of those weren't in the DLCS but in other Sovereign Press DL products. Dragonlance is an official WOTC licensed product line, though, which does place it a little higher than third party settings.

Dragonlance's new four are the noble, the mystic (which differs from the favored soul in that it's a spontaneous divine caster with a domain), the mariner, and the master. The master is to the expert what the fighter is to the warrior, and centers around the four 'subskill' skills in D&D - Craft, Knowledge, Perform, and Profession. Each master chooses one of these as his focus at 1st level and gains another at 7th level, and picks up knacks (similar to d20 Modern's talents) along the way as well as bonus feats relating to skills. The master allows scholar characters, non-spellcasting bards, adventuring blacksmiths, merchants, and other characters which occupy a more even footing compared to other characters than the NPC expert would. The master also fills a niche that the rogue is often used for but without the sneak attack & combat focus.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[JoeGKushner]

And as far as a different rogue, Unearthed Arcana has a variant where they lose sneak attack and gain bonus feats as a fighter.

 

[Dragonhelm]

That is why I wanted a tinker base class, and there is one, in the Warcraft Campaign Setting. But I wanted one for the DLCS. I mean, it doesnt have to be just Gnomes who can take it. After all, there were the Karthayans, who were Tinkers, even if they did get wiped out, there is still preceedence for Human Tinker types in Dragonlance. Not to mention I can easily see the Knights of Solamnia sending some people to be taught by the gnomes. You could have Solamnic War Engineers or something like that.

I could see Dwarves taking up the class too!

The master fills this role in Dragonlance. Check out War of the Lance for details.

 

[Staffan]

And as far as a different rogue, Unearthed Arcana has a variant where they lose sneak attack and gain bonus feats as a fighter.

Assuming you mean Unfettered, I always saw them more as "fighter with a bit of rogue" than "rogue with a bit of fighter." The bonus feats, full BAB, and AC bonuses tend to push them into more of a fighting role than the 4 skill points and low-level sneak attack makes them rogueish.

But I do think it makes a better swashbuckler than the one in Complete Warrior.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Assuming you mean Unfettered, I always saw them more as "fighter with a bit of rogue" than "rogue with a bit of fighter." The bonus feats, full BAB, and AC bonuses tend to push them into more of a fighting role than the 4 skill points and low-level sneak attack makes them rogueish.

But I do think it makes a better swashbuckler than the one in Complete Warrior.

No. Unearthed Arcana, a Wizards of the Coast book, not Arcana Evolved, a Monte Cook/Malhavoc book.

Rogues have all their standard abilities, but lose sneak attack. In exchange, they gain bonus fighter feats.

 

[Akrasia]

I rather dislike the proliferation of base classes in 3e -- it seems somewhat contrary to one of the alleged strengths of the system, viz. the options and variations available within each class.

I think I would prefer fewer base classes, but with a wider range of options for each. ...

I agree. I think that the way to go is with fewer, more flexible classes.

E.g. The three 'generic classes' in Unearthed Arcana. Let players build their own PCs through multiclassing, and their selection of feats and skills.

Or better yet: True20's three classes (which allows players to use feats in order customise their PCs).

 

[Staffan]

No. Unearthed Arcana, a Wizards of the Coast book, not Arcana Evolved, a Monte Cook/Malhavoc book.

Argh! I'm usually the one complaining about people getting the two confused...

 

[theRogueRooster]

Or better yet: True20's three classes (which allows players to use feats in order customise their PCs).

I'd love for D&D to go this route. Seriously, I'd have the warm fuzzies for a year straight.

For the uninformed, True20 pares your class selection down to three base classes (Warrior, Expert, Adept) and converts all class abilities into feats. Each level, instead of gaining class abilities, you choose a feat for your character. Your class selection determines your BAB and save progressions, everything else is determined by feats.

Suddenly, feat selection defines your character. An unarmored, agile fighter is no longer tethered with unused Armor Proficiency feats. No more need for all those alt.ranger classes since everyone can create their own flavor through simple feat choice. And the neat thing is all flavors could peacefully co-exist in the same campaign.



-tRR

 

[brehobit]

A scholar class.

Some kind of "noble/warrior".

While house-rules, the following in a link to a scholarly warrior:
http://www.enworld.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=22921