Regal (Royalty base class concept.)

[xigbar]

I was think that a lot of classes can be made suitable for the concept of a character of royal lineage, but why isn't there one specifically for it? The closes I came, mechanically, was the Marshal, since support based abilities seems what I'd do. I made something of a rough draft for the idea.

Regal

Average BAB, Good Fort/Will
D8, Proficiency in all Simple Weapons, and the Rapier.
Proficient in Light Armor and Shields. Skills: 6+Int Mod, Appraise, Bluff, Decipher Script, Diplomacy, Disguise, Gather Information, Intimidate, Knowledge (Nobility/Royalty), Knowledge (History), Listen, Perform, Profession, Ride, Search, Sense Motive, Spot. Paladin Casting Progression.

1st: Command +1, Offensive Command, Defensive Command
2nd: Inspiring Strike +1
3rd: Tough Command, Quick Command, Profound Command
4th: Command +2
5th: Inspiring Strike +2
6th: Leadership, Great Leader +1
7th: Command +3
8th: Inspiring Strike +3
9th: -
10th: Command +4, Rally Command
11th: Inspiring Strike +4, Magical Command
12th: Great Leader +2
13th: Command +5
14th: Inspiring Strike +5
15th: Passion Command
16th: Command +6
17th: Inspiring Strike +6
18th: Great Leader +3
19th: Command +7
20th: Inspiring Strike +7, All Out Assault Command

Command +X; Add the bonus to all the Command abilities, to all allies within 60ft. Full Round Action to use, stackable, can't have more in effect than your base bonus. (yes, I'm not writing out fluff right now.) Each one is usable 3/day. Must be able to speak to use the ability.

Offensive; To Damage
Defensive; To AC
Tough; To FORT
Quick; To REF
Profound; To Will
Rally; +5ft Movement/ bonus
Magic; Caster Level Checks
Passion Command; Causes Rage, add Command Bonus to STR/CON.
All Out Assault; All allies attack, deal an extra 1d6+Numbers of Commands effected by, +xd6, x=command bonus.

Inspiring Strike: Add to attack bonus 1+Cha Mod/day, succesful strikes adds same bonus to allies Attack/Damage rolls until your next turn.

Leadership: Bonus Feat.

Great Leader: Add bonus to all Cha based checks, and Leadership score.

 

[kitcik]

Good class idea for Gamma World.

Needs a duration.

Could be "broken" at higher levels?

 

[Visigani]

I'm going to take three levels of Black Man.


*facepalm*

Royalty isn't a "Class" in the D&D sense. It's something you're born into or acquire. Further, the rules you do apply to it are just as nonsensical. It's unlikely this guy was a badass in a fist fight:

At best you could adopt the "Aristocracy" generic class and that's kind of what you've got minus all the broken .

 

[kitcik]

I'm going to take three levels of Black Man.

Don't worry, this is not offensive and is directly analogous to royalty.

Royalty isn't a "Class" in the D&D sense. It's something you're born into or acquire. Further, the rules you do apply to it are just as nonsensical. It's unlikely this guy was a badass in a fist fight:

Why do you think the D&D world is an inherited monarchy? Most I've seen are pseudo-meritocracies where the powerful rise to the top.

 

[xigbar]

I'm going to take three levels of Black Man.


*facepalm*

Royalty isn't a "Class" in the D&D sense. It's something you're born into or acquire. Further, the rules you do apply to it are just as nonsensical. It's unlikely this guy was a badass in a fist fight:

At best you could adopt the "Aristocracy" generic class and that's kind of what you've got minus all the broken .

Thanks for the help.

 

[El Mahdi]

If we are talking 3.x, there are some classes from some publications that should work, but first about about setting.

I think it depends on what your setting conceits are.

Are we talking about a typical D&D Fantasy setting (pseudo-medieval Europe), or are we talking about more of a real-world setting.

In a typical D&D Fantasy setting, it does seem the most common course to a throne is through one's own strength (fighting skill) and leadership. In which case your class above isn't too bad, but a Warrior/Knight type character would be better.

In the real world, this would be less so. A monarch may have been trained as a Knight himself, and gained the leadership skills of a General - or may have been less skilled in such things (though is likely still familiar with them and recieved some training), and is more of just a Noble who has risen to the throne through heredity...but knows how to lead people who do have the requisite fighting and leadership skills.

So, in the real-world, a simple Noble or Aristocrat class would work just as well as some kind of Knight or Warrior.

For classes, an Expert loaded up on Nobility and Leadership skills would work: Generic Classes :: d20srd.org

Or as mentioned earlier, the Aristocrat class: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/npcClasses/aristocrat.htm

Also, there is a Noble class in the Game of Thrones D20 game (the Guardians of Order, Sword & Sorcery game) that could also work.

For most other uses, a Knight-like Warrior with Leadership skills works just as well.

As to the class you made, it's not bad. I don't think it's overpowered. It definitely has some Controller/Leader type elements (to use a 4E-ism). And seems to grab the flavor you're looking for. As a GM, I wouldn't have a problem allowing it in any game I run. It would have to be the right kind of player though, as the benefits seem to apply to the group much more than the character themself. The character should definitely be staying off the front line and being a leader, and likely won't be involved in as much action because of that. That type of character is definitely not for everybody.

Cheers.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Royalty isn't a "Class" in the D&D sense. It's something you're born into or acquire. Further, the rules you do apply to it are just as nonsensical.

The Aristocrat class says, "Hi!"

 

[Jackinthegreen]

You might want to take a look at the Noble from the Dragonlance Campaign Setting. It's not exactly a great class, but it can serve as a good starting point.

 

[xigbar]

To those saying there are other options, I know, but most people wouldn;t be willing to play the aristocrat, because, well, it sucks. I'll check on the noble that was mentioned a couple of times.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

but most people wouldn;t be willing to play the aristocrat, because, well, it sucks

It's actually not a bad class at all, all things considered.

But, you misread me - I was just pointing out that Visigani's argument against the royal class didn't make any sense, given the prior existence of the Aristocrat class.