Sadrik
First Post
Thank you for your reply, but the sky will not fall if you change class features. Give me a break, the game system is much more robust than you are implying.
Quite honestly I don't think you have read anything in the thread.
Removing Class Roles
- Thread starter Sadrik
- Start date
Quite honestly I don't think you have read anything in the thread.
Storminator
First Post
No, the sky would not fall. But if you change some class features, you haven't changed the roles. Is Hunter's Quarry what makes a Ranger a Striker, or is it that he Twin Strikes at-will, or is that Split the Tree deals out huge damage? Or perhaps it's the synergy...
Is Healing Word what makes a cleric a leader, or do the long, long list of healing Powers play a part?
In your first post, you put
and IMO, there's a lot more to the role than some class features and at-will powers. If you really want to strip out character roles, then you have to address everything in my post, at a minimum.
If you just want to fiddle some class features, you shouldn't think of it as removing roles from classes.
Oh no, I read it.
PS
Starfox
Hero
The way to do is probably to reduce the influence of classes and make them about as important as origins and roles. A character would have origin as their most important classification (this gives the meta-group of powers you can select from), then class and role determines the exact powers available to you.
This is what needs to be done: Make a revision of each origin. Tag each power with role and class keywords. Some powers are more flavorful than role-specific, these get the class tag. Some are more role-specific, these get the role tag. Replace the current class abilities with one base package for your class and another one for your role (similar to how dual classing works) and then pick powers with your role and class keywords.
It would be a lot of work, and the result would have to be tweaked a lot and character creation would be much more complex, but it is probably doable. Don't sign me up for it, but I do have a player that I think would like the idea.
This is what needs to be done: Make a revision of each origin. Tag each power with role and class keywords. Some powers are more flavorful than role-specific, these get the class tag. Some are more role-specific, these get the role tag. Replace the current class abilities with one base package for your class and another one for your role (similar to how dual classing works) and then pick powers with your role and class keywords.
It would be a lot of work, and the result would have to be tweaked a lot and character creation would be much more complex, but it is probably doable. Don't sign me up for it, but I do have a player that I think would like the idea.
Hmm i've got 2 Options:
1. Everything is as normal but a MArtial characte rmay choose from EVERY Martial class powers.
2. everythign stays as it is but you choose your class from the Role you want to play:
Magical striker = Sorcerer/Warlock, Striker Warrior = Rogue/Ranger, etc.
Because: the classes don't fuel any role because the classes are the epitomes of that special role. If you want to choose your role, choose the right class!
1. Everything is as normal but a MArtial characte rmay choose from EVERY Martial class powers.
2. everythign stays as it is but you choose your class from the Role you want to play:
Magical striker = Sorcerer/Warlock, Striker Warrior = Rogue/Ranger, etc.
Because: the classes don't fuel any role because the classes are the epitomes of that special role. If you want to choose your role, choose the right class!
cdrcjsn
First Post
Well, the latest Dragon magazine excerpts had a playtest of the dual class feature that is supposed to come up in a future supplement.
In it, they defined some class abilities that they thought were central to the role, and allowed the PC to take on others using a feat.
So if you want to know what WotC thinks is central to a class with regards to its role, then all you have to do is look at which features they thought essential.
Interestingly enough, some classes rely on class features to define their role (ability to mark, extra damage, etc) whereas some are defined almost entirely by their powers (wizards).
It'll be tough to separate the roles from the classes, but I agree with others in that it's not really needed. The base system really is flexible enough. You can build a controller warlord. You can make a Striker cleric.
In it, they defined some class abilities that they thought were central to the role, and allowed the PC to take on others using a feat.
So if you want to know what WotC thinks is central to a class with regards to its role, then all you have to do is look at which features they thought essential.
Interestingly enough, some classes rely on class features to define their role (ability to mark, extra damage, etc) whereas some are defined almost entirely by their powers (wizards).
It'll be tough to separate the roles from the classes, but I agree with others in that it's not really needed. The base system really is flexible enough. You can build a controller warlord. You can make a Striker cleric.
tyrlaan
Explorer
QFT
Each class in 4e is designed around the role. Here's an analogy - 4e is the universe. Each class is a solar system. Each solar system revolves around a sun. Each sun is equal to a role. In other words, everything in a class revolves around the role. Sure, you can put in a great deal of effort to deliberately pick up powers that are as against role as possible, but it's not an easy task. And even then you still have your assorted class features.
I'm not saying this because I think each class must be tied to a role. I'm saying this because I feel the notion that this is a simple exercise is by no means accurate.
Assuming I am understanding the intent of the initial question posed here, I think the answer is not to try to strip roles out of the classes, but rather to build in all of the roles to the classes. For example, if someone wants to play a wizard defender I would envision it working because they summon things to serve as meat shields. Just having generic defender powers to pick from doesn't work.
The easiest way I can see to strip the roles out of the classes is to strip the fluff off the mechanics.
1) Remove the class names off of every class, and the power & ability names off of every power & ability.
2) Have the player decide what kind of character they want to play, including the role and power source. Then determine what his/her "class name" best fits.
3) Assign him/her the fluff-free class mechanics that best do what the player is looking for.
4) Reapply the fluff names from the "class name" they chose onto the mechanics of the class they wanted to play.
This will solve most of your problems.
So if you wanted to play a "cleric" who is a "defender"... use all the "paladin" mechanics and just change all the names of its fluff to all the names used in the cleric class. Voila! A "defender cleric".
Similarly... you want to play a wizard who shoots magic missiles or fireballs much more frequently and against varied targets. Strip the fluff off of the ranger archery build, reapply some wizard names to the class and powers, and voila! You have a wizard who gets to twin-strike everything.
Granted, you'll probably need to remove or fudge some pre-reqs and stuff (like changing the weapon requirements from the rogue exploits etc.), but that can be done as-needed on a case-by-case basis.
And as a final example... for everyone who wants a martial controller character. Take the druid and remove all fluff. Reapply fighter fluff to it, including the new at-will ability "change stance" (aka wild shape). Any time the player wants to use a beast form evocatio-- um, I mean "offensive stance" exploit... they use a minor action to "change stance". And when they "change stance" back to "defensive stance", they get a free shift. And all the other controller powers work out as well, with just minor tweaking here and there.
1) Remove the class names off of every class, and the power & ability names off of every power & ability.
2) Have the player decide what kind of character they want to play, including the role and power source. Then determine what his/her "class name" best fits.
3) Assign him/her the fluff-free class mechanics that best do what the player is looking for.
4) Reapply the fluff names from the "class name" they chose onto the mechanics of the class they wanted to play.
This will solve most of your problems.
So if you wanted to play a "cleric" who is a "defender"... use all the "paladin" mechanics and just change all the names of its fluff to all the names used in the cleric class. Voila! A "defender cleric".
Similarly... you want to play a wizard who shoots magic missiles or fireballs much more frequently and against varied targets. Strip the fluff off of the ranger archery build, reapply some wizard names to the class and powers, and voila! You have a wizard who gets to twin-strike everything.
Granted, you'll probably need to remove or fudge some pre-reqs and stuff (like changing the weapon requirements from the rogue exploits etc.), but that can be done as-needed on a case-by-case basis.
And as a final example... for everyone who wants a martial controller character. Take the druid and remove all fluff. Reapply fighter fluff to it, including the new at-will ability "change stance" (aka wild shape). Any time the player wants to use a beast form evocatio-- um, I mean "offensive stance" exploit... they use a minor action to "change stance". And when they "change stance" back to "defensive stance", they get a free shift. And all the other controller powers work out as well, with just minor tweaking here and there.
Sadrik
First Post
I like this conceptually. There is one thing to consider and correct me if I am wrong the powers have key words that like "fire" for instance, how would you handle those additionally the [W] is better that 1d6 or whatever the static damage is. Carry them straight accross and not worry, what would you do?
The keyword issue would only be a real factor in moving from the martial power source to one of the others (or from the others into martial). Divine, arcane, & primal all use most of the "effects" keywords, whereas martial stays mainly with Weapon. So you'd have to strip or add keywords as needed to make the powers line up like their real class counterparts. Same thing holds true with changing [W] damage to set magic damage... for the most part you probably would just need to cross-reference the mechanics of the new class to what the old class would get at a similar level and make your best guesstimation.
Although really... for most class you probably can stay within your power source when making the mechanics switches, and thus keywords and damage issues would occur less frequently. The divine classes will all have numerous Radiant powers that you wouldn't have to change, all the martial classes already have the Weapon keyword etc.
In the end... you're going to have to take a look at the basic power mechanics your player selects at each level, then manually adjust the keywords and damage that make the most sense, especially when going across power sources. But in the end, a classes full set of powers across all levels is pretty well balanced against the other classes... so as long as your player takes the mechanics from just one class, minor adjustments of keywords and the like won't cause much issue (unless you as DM do something stupid like give every single power in a player's arsenal the Fire keyword regardless of what the effect is, and especially if the player is a tiefling.)
As another swap example... say your player wants to be a warlock that has demons at his beck and call. You can either strip the fluff off of a summoner wizard and change it all to make each summoned creature a demon now... or you can strip the fluff off of a beastmaster ranger and change one of the animal pets into a demon pet (if the player wanted a permanent one). Voila! WoW-styled warlock for your player!
Although really... for most class you probably can stay within your power source when making the mechanics switches, and thus keywords and damage issues would occur less frequently. The divine classes will all have numerous Radiant powers that you wouldn't have to change, all the martial classes already have the Weapon keyword etc.
In the end... you're going to have to take a look at the basic power mechanics your player selects at each level, then manually adjust the keywords and damage that make the most sense, especially when going across power sources. But in the end, a classes full set of powers across all levels is pretty well balanced against the other classes... so as long as your player takes the mechanics from just one class, minor adjustments of keywords and the like won't cause much issue (unless you as DM do something stupid like give every single power in a player's arsenal the Fire keyword regardless of what the effect is, and especially if the player is a tiefling.)
As another swap example... say your player wants to be a warlock that has demons at his beck and call. You can either strip the fluff off of a summoner wizard and change it all to make each summoned creature a demon now... or you can strip the fluff off of a beastmaster ranger and change one of the animal pets into a demon pet (if the player wanted a permanent one). Voila! WoW-styled warlock for your player!
