Role rigidity

[Lanefan]

Always begun? What does that even mean? It did begin with rigid class roles, and after a few years it started trending towards more flexible character build options.

I'll hazard a guess it means a view that *each new edition* has begun that way, and drifted away from it once the bloat started. Which is kinda true, if you think about it.

Lanefan

 

[Thundershield]

3) I'm reminded of a player I had several years ago who wanted to play a iajutsu master. And not just a realistic one, an anime styled one who draws his weapon, cuts once, and returns it once per round. There weren't any rules for one at the time, so I suggested we design a character for him out of the rogue class. That seemed like the best option- he wanted to be fast on his feet, agile, mobile, and he wanted to attack only once per round with high accuracy and damage. A rogue with Improved Feint seemed ideal. Feinting would make his attacks more accurate, and grant him sneak attack damage, which would make them more damaging.

He HATED my idea. He didn't WANT to play a rogue! He wanted to play an iajutsu master! That's completely different than a rogue!

To this day I do not understand this attitude. If you can build a character that does all the things you want, then the game is flexible enough to accommodate your vision. The fact that you have to play a fighter, or a rogue, or a fighter/rogue to accomplish your goals shouldn't be important.

But I guess some people feel strongly otherwise. I'm not sure whether accommodating them is a good thing, or whether its just giving in to irrationality.

Indeed, being able to set mechanical terms aside for the sake of your character's concept is something anyone should be able to. As long as it plays right and mechanically gets you what you want, one shouldn't be bothered if it says "Rogue/Fighter" or "Rogue/Fighter Iaijutsu Master" on the character sheet.

The Rogue/Fighter would be an excellent "core only" Iaijutsu Master adaptation as Evasion and a high number of ranks in Bluff could represent the quick wit, and Improved Feint would represent the utilitization of this quick wit in combat, enabling the character to strike decisive blows where the opponent is the weakest - just like Iaijutsu Masters do.

The game mechanical terms are merely fluff for easy reference. If we took your example to the extreme that player might complain that the game doesn't let him express that his character has an amazing reaction speed, because "Improved Initiative" sounds wrong. It should've been called "Improved Reaction Speed" for him..

Seriously, it's just names for stuff to we all can understand and easily reference what we're talking about. That's the reason we're have this community based on this system - because we can talk about it in a language we all understand. Simply set yourself beyond that in your own game and call your abilities whatever suits you to get the right feel for the game, and revert to the mechanical terms when talking with someone from outside your gaming group.

 

[neceros]

Unless the multiclassing rules are a lot better than they are currently

They are.

So far as I know (And that's not to say I know a lot yet)

1 .) Everyone progresses at the same BAB. Your powers and talent tree determine your actual to hit.
2 .) There is no multiclass penalty regarding Exp.

Also, to address your concern: The developers have been saying they will be giving everyone some sort of method for keeping themselves alive, if even for a little bit longer. Apparently, everyone has a method of healing, or at least not dying. Mixed with potions and whatnot It hink you'll be okay so long as you aren't 4 defenders... And even then just take turns defending and you should end up alive.



We'll have to wait and see.

 

[DreamChaser]

I'll hazard a guess it means a view that *each new edition* has begun that way, and drifted away from it once the bloat started. Which is kinda true, if you think about it.

Lanefan

Exactly.

1e moved away from it with Unearthed Arcana (more classes, more options, etc.)
2e moved away from it with Skills & Powers (classes became largely footnotes on the character)
3e moved away from it with 66 base classes and hundreds of prestige classes (many of which were designed to blur the lines - like Mystic Theurge)

I honestly think that it is inevitable - people like more options and like to break out of the strict forms, but the success of each successive edition at the time of release tells me that a return to the simplicity of more rigid roles is generally well received.

DC

 

[DreamChaser]

They are.

So far as I know (And that's not to say I know a lot yet)

1 .) Everyone progresses at the same BAB. Your powers and talent tree determine your actual to hit.
2 .) There is no multiclass penalty regarding Exp.

Not that BAB or XP penalties are the reason that 3e multiclassing was rough. It has always been all about the spells. There is little or no harm (and potential great benefit) to playing a fighter 1, barbarian 1, ranger 1, rogue 1. You actually come out nearly better than a level 4 in any one of those classes. But add in a single level of sorcerer....

That said, the move away from spells per day and pseudo-Vancian systems will likely relieve much of this problem.

DC

 

[neceros]

Not that BAB or XP penalties are the reason that 3e multiclassing was rough. It has always been all about the spells. There is little or no harm (and potential great benefit) to playing a fighter 1, barbarian 1, ranger 1, rogue 1. You actually come out nearly better than a level 4 in any one of those classes. But add in a single level of sorcerer....

That said, the move away from spells per day and pseudo-Vancian systems will likely relieve much of this problem.

DC

I agree. My favorite type of characters to design are gishes (melee + caster), so I know how hard it can be to make sure you have the spell power. The myriad of prestige classes and feats make it possible. I'm only assuming these extras won't be in 4e core, so I hope they understand that this sort of character is amazingly fun to play.

 

[Klaus]

I've been thinking.

Up until 3e, you chose your class first. (okay, up until 2e you rolled up first and chose based on the stats you got).

It seems now that in 4e you will be advised to chose the role you want to play first, and then a power source that covers that role. So instead of saying "I wanna play a Dex-based Fighter" you say "I wanna play a striker. A martial striker." and then proceed to building one.

Maybe in 5e the classes will be flavorless, and instead of having the classinc party be Fighter, Rogue, Cleric and Wizard, it'll be Martial Defender, Martial Striker, Divine Leader and Arcane Controller.

 

[Kaffis]

I disagree. I couldn't care less about what the class field on my character sheet says, but I care a lot about building the character I want regardless of the classes I need to use to get there.

Unless the multiclassing rules are a lot better than they are currently, the easiest way to do that is to make powers and abilities more readily available regardless of class, not more closely tied to class. I'm already headed the exact opposite direction in my games; converting class abilities (especially from prestige classes) to feat chains right and left.

But what you're doing is accomplishing the same thing as multiclassing with a talent system. The reason 3.x multiclassing doesn't work for what you want is because in order to get, say, hide in plain sight out of the ranger class abilities, you need to invest 10+ levels and pick up a bunch of features that aren't part of your character concept and totally unrelated to hiding in plain sight, like favored enemies and combat styles. All that just so you can get the one lousy ability you want to define your character.

Now, look at Star Wars Saga Ed.: No single class ability (talent) requires investing more than 3-5 levels in that class (and most only require 1-3), during which you're picking up prerequisites for the talent chain the same as you'd spend picking up prereqs for the feat chain. Multiclassing to cherry-pick an ability is far less painful, and they're probably removing favored classes (and the accompanying experience penalty for not following them) to make said cherry-picking even more reasonable.

What's not to like? How is a feat chain *better*? It's different, yes, but it's very similar in its outcome.