Rule of 3. May 8th

[Hautamaki]

That approach works as long as the cleric doesn't ALSO get a pile of standard cleric spells and abilities.

Niche protection isn't necessarily about not allowing multiple ways to arrive at the same abilities. It's more about preventing one class from doing on type of job, and doing another class's job just as well.

Naturally 'spotlight time' needs to be somewhat balanced overall, but doesn't a rogue also have a bunch of other standard abilities besides sneaking around?

Ultimately, I think that all classes should be as 'specialisable' or 'generalisable' as a player wants, and most of them should be able to most of the things the various classes can do now. However the exact combination of things that each class can excel in, and the mechanical systems that represent how they accomplish various tasks, and the fluff of course, should all be distinct; though, as I said above, balanced overall.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I didn't like his answer to #3.

I don't think classes should necessarily have that much 'niche protection'. I think that if you are a cleric of the God of sneakiness you should be just as good at sneaking around as a sneaky rogue.

The big thing to remember here is that it won't be the skills the cleric has that will prevent him from being "as good" as the rogue, I don't think. Both the rogue and the lurker cleric will quite possibly have the same mechanical options that allow them to be sneaky.

But the big difference will probably come down to something as simple as ability scores.

Across all rogues and lurker clerics that get made, I would imagine that rogues on average will have higher DEX that clerics will. Which means that even with all other things being equal between the two... the rogues will tend to be just a little bit better simply due to the extra point or two they get from usually having a slightly better DEX.

And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Now, yes, absolutely... some cleric players will take their DEX high and on par with the rogue... but they'll probably end up having to sacrifice bonuses to other cleric stuff to do so. And thus many players might decide that sacrifice isn't worth it. So they'll make the choice that having that 18 in DEX and losing out elsewhere isn't as beneficial as a 16 in DEX and the other points spread elsewhere. They still get to be VERY GOOD Lurker Clerics... they just won't always be AS GOOD as rogues will be.

 

[Hautamaki]

The big thing to remember here is that it won't be the skills the cleric has that will prevent him from being "as good" as the rogue, I don't think. Both the rogue and the lurker cleric will quite possibly have the same mechanical options that allow them to be sneaky.

But the big difference will probably come down to something as simple as ability scores.

Across all rogues and lurker clerics that get made, I would imagine that rogues on average will have higher DEX that clerics will. Which means that even with all other things being equal between the two... the rogues will tend to be just a little bit better simply due to the extra point or two they get from usually having a slightly better DEX.

And I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Now, yes, absolutely... some cleric players will take their DEX high and on par with the rogue... but they'll probably end up having to sacrifice bonuses to other cleric stuff to do so. And thus many players might decide that sacrifice isn't worth it. So they'll make the choice that having that 18 in DEX and losing out elsewhere isn't as beneficial as a 16 in DEX and the other points spread elsewhere. They still get to be VERY GOOD Lurker Clerics... they just won't always be AS GOOD as rogues will be.

Good points about the ability scores. Presumably Rogues will have better DEX on average, but equally presumably a sneaky-god worshiping cleric specializes in sneaky prayers/divine powers that make up the difference and then some--but are a limited resource. Hence the mechanical difference in getting to about the same endpoint.

 

[pemerton]

I think that if you are a cleric of the God of sneakiness you should be just as good at sneaking around as a sneaky rogue.

Presumably Rogues will have better DEX on average, but equally presumably a sneaky-god worshiping cleric specializes in sneaky prayers/divine powers that make up the difference and then some--but are a limited resource. Hence the mechanical difference in getting to about the same endpoint.

This doesn't quite work for me.

If it's implausible that a rogue should be sneakier than the high priest of the god of sneakiness, then why is not equally implausible that the high priest of the god of sneakiness is limited in the number of sneaky prayers that s/he can recite each day?

And, conversely, if we can accept a gameworld in which the god of sneakiness sometimes doesn't answer his/her faithful high priest's prayer, thereby leaving that priest to be a failed sneak, why can we not accept a gameworld in which a rogue is sometimes sneakier than the most devout high priest of the god of sneakiness?

 

[Hautamaki]

This doesn't quite work for me.

If it's implausible that a rogue should be sneakier than the high priest of the god of sneakiness, then why is not equally implausible that the high priest of the god of sneakiness is limited in the number of sneaky prayers that s/he can recite each day?

And, conversely, if we can accept a gameworld in which the god of sneakiness sometimes doesn't answer his/her faithful high priest's prayer, thereby leaving that priest to be a failed sneak, why can we not accept a gameworld in which a rogue is sometimes sneakier than the most devout high priest of the god of sneakiness?

Of course a rogue can sometimes be sneakier than the most devout high priest of the god of sneakiness. I just put more emphasis on 'sometimes'. Overall, if you want to be a master sneak, you should have at least 3 equally valid and balanced options: rogue, cleric, or mage. A ranger, in his element, should also be in that top tier. As it is now, if you are playing a sneaky character that is not a rogue, or at least mostly a rogue, you are playing a mechanically sub-optimal character; the rules are punishing your choice to try to sneak around without picking the rogue class. It may be only slightly, but it's there and I don't agree that it necessarily should be.

Of course this goes for more than just sneaky characters. For all types of characters there is one best class that you should pick, and every other choice is, to varying degrees, mechanically punished. This sort of system somewhat limits the creativity of players and it also rewards system mastery when I'd personally rather see a system that allows you to create virtually any character you can imagine that is at least somewhat logically consistent and then rewards you for finding creative ways to play to your character's strengths within whatever situations your character gets into.

 

[Andor]

You know what I get oit of that article?

"A lot of things are still up in the air and being kicked around at a basic level. So no, we don't know when we'll be publishing the game becuase it's not even close to being done, and we're going to try our damndest to get it right."

And I like that.

 

[pemerton]

As it is now, if you are playing a sneaky character that is not a rogue, or at least mostly a rogue, you are playing a mechanically sub-optimal character

<snip>

For all types of characters there is one best class that you should pick, and every other choice is, to varying degrees, mechanically punished.

I don't agree with these claims about sub-optimality and punishment.

If I build a sneaky cleric I may be a sub-optimal sneaker, but it doesn't follow that my PC is sub-optimal overall - I'm probably a better healer and diviner than the rogue.

And I may still be a viable sneaker. A PC doesn't have to be the best at a particular function to still be viable at undertaking that function.

 

[Balesir]

Of course a rogue can sometimes be sneakier than the most devout high priest of the god of sneakiness. I just put more emphasis on 'sometimes'. Overall, if you want to be a master sneak, you should have at least 3 equally valid and balanced options: rogue, cleric, or mage. A ranger, in his element, should also be in that top tier. As it is now, if you are playing a sneaky character that is not a rogue, or at least mostly a rogue, you are playing a mechanically sub-optimal character; the rules are punishing your choice to try to sneak around without picking the rogue class. It may be only slightly, but it's there and I don't agree that it necessarily should be.

Of course this goes for more than just sneaky characters. For all types of characters there is one best class that you should pick, and every other choice is, to varying degrees, mechanically punished. This sort of system somewhat limits the creativity of players and it also rewards system mastery when I'd personally rather see a system that allows you to create virtually any character you can imagine that is at least somewhat logically consistent and then rewards you for finding creative ways to play to your character's strengths within whatever situations your character gets into.

It sounds to me like you want a game system that is fundamentally classless, but has "class" included as colour and flavour. If I wanted that effect I would most probably use Hero Wars (or something like it) with mandatory descriptors that give the flavour and method surrounding a character's key abilities. I.e. your fundamental (mechanical) abilities are things like "sneaky" and things like "trapsense", "surprise attack" and so on, while the "flavour and colour" descriptor determines whether you do this by physical prowess, arcane manipulations or divine assistance.

 

[gyor]

the priest of sneakiness bad at stealth, its just that he relies more on divine magic instead of just on raw ability. For example a priest's magic would be vulnerable to wards, natural magic resistance, counterspelling, dispel magic spells, antimagic fields, dead magic zones, or the death of your God, all if which has no bearing on the Rogue. Plus the Rogue might have a few tricks that the Cleric's magic can't dupilicate.

I also agree giving the fighter an entire pillar is too much, that like saying the Rogue gets exploring and the Bard roleplaying, okay nothing for the rest of you.

 

[gyor]

Also according to a recent blog Domains were themes. Am I the only one getting confused, are they class features or themes? Both?