Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Draugin" data-source="post: 946811" data-attributes="member: 12173">I tinkered with that idea, Woodelf, at the age of 2nd edition, when multiclassing was not a clever mechanic so at last I rejected it. Basically, that's the old idea of &quot;four (or little more) basic classes by which you can extract your own character&quot;.The main old stream revolves about four classes (warrior, rogue, mage and priest, you called them warrior, expert, caster and faithful), mixed so that if you pick up some levels of warrior and many of priest you can mimic a cleric, with more levels of warrior and a little of priest you can have a paladin and so on.Adding the primitive and zen is interesting, and I think that it could work.This is more or less the same thing they've done with d20 Modern.Actually, I think you're shifting many class abilities to feat and feat chains, and that could bring to more flexibility.BUT the fact is, if you give more freedom, be careful that many min-maxers and munchkins will surely find a way to make a uber-PC. With fixed classes and multiclass restrictions they are toning down the problem.Secondary, I know that the class system is just a game mechanic, but how many players are aware of that? They think in terms of &quot;barbarian&quot; or &quot;cleric&quot; and it's the class that makes the character and not the reverse, as it should be.So if you remove standard class flavour, you could lead to more abstract thinking - some players could react well, and start thinking about their PCs and not about their classes, but some others will simply start thinking about their warrior/zen/caster.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Draugin, post: 946811, member: 12173"] I tinkered with that idea, Woodelf, at the age of 2nd edition, when multiclassing was not a clever mechanic so at last I rejected it. Basically, that's the old idea of "four (or little more) basic classes by which you can extract your own character". The main old stream revolves about four classes (warrior, rogue, mage and priest, you called them warrior, expert, caster and faithful), mixed so that if you pick up some levels of warrior and many of priest you can mimic a cleric, with more levels of warrior and a little of priest you can have a paladin and so on. Adding the primitive and zen is interesting, and I think that it could work. This is more or less the same thing they've done with d20 Modern. Actually, I think you're shifting many class abilities to feat and feat chains, and that could bring to more flexibility. BUT the fact is, if you give more freedom, be careful that many min-maxers and munchkins will surely find a way to make a uber-PC. With fixed classes and multiclass restrictions they are toning down the problem. Secondary, I know that the class system is just a game mechanic, but how many players are aware of that? They think in terms of "barbarian" or "cleric" and it's the class that makes the character and not the reverse, as it should be. So if you remove standard class flavour, you could lead to more abstract thinking - some players could react well, and start thinking about their PCs and not about their classes, but some others will simply start thinking about their warrior/zen/caster. [/QUOTE]

Verification