Sub Levels -> Alternate Class Features

[blargney the second]

The Changeling Rogue 1st level Sub is also damn good. Gather Info checks in minutes, not hours. Take 10 on Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Info, Intimidate, and Sense Motive? yes please.

One of the characters I'm playing right now has that sub level. It's wicked fun! I'm actually looking at doing a rebuild with him that extensively uses alternate features from various sources that will replace every single rogue feature.
-blarg

 

[Dragonhelm]

Is there anywhere online that has the basic format for alternate class features?

 

[GreatLemur]

I see this argument constantly, but I really don't buy into it because...
1) Excessive flexibility in chargen is as often abused as used effectively. (Back in 2e, I had a player who wanted to play a particular elven race with a human only kit, because they were AWESOME together. It was obvious to me when he suggested the character what the intent was.)

I cannot disagree with that. It's pretty much a given that greater flexibility means greater exploitability. I'm admittedly not really thinking about what would be best for the game as a whole, as what I'd prefer due to my personal style of play. I've never been the kind of guy who can scheme my way to a +10 BAB at fourth level; I'm just a guy who'd like to be able to build a priest who doesn't heal and turn undead, or an effective unarmed, non-mystical warrior . . . without having to make up a whole new class.

2) Players often aren't so flexible and creative as they think they are. Even if you are creative, I've heard authors tell me their best work is not when they had a blank slate, but a goal.

I completely understand and agree with that. Again, I admit to not worrying about what Drizzt-clone-player-#6572 needs in a game. I'm being blatantly self-centered, here.

3) Even if they are, often their concepts are an ill fit with the game world. By selecting classes and options that FIT the concept of the world, the shared vision can be that much better.

So are you thinking about D&D as a game that comes along with a setting? I've been thinking more of the d20 system itself, with the assumption that it should be adaptable to various, wildly-different worlds. I'd just find it a lot easier to set up my homebrew setting the way I want if I could say "You can use feats from these lists, except for these ones here, and if you wanna play a so-and-so, you have to take this feat, and if you're using feats from this tree, that means that you're drawing on the such-and-such power, which has these implications in the setting..." and so on, instead of customizing the everloving crap out of existing classes so that they fit my concept, and forcing my players to think about Clerics, Barbarians, Rangers, Wizards, etc. in completely new ways. "The Shapeshifter class is mostly the Druid, except and they've got these change to their wildshape ability, and they don't really have any connection to nature, and no animal companion, and here's their new spell list, and their new class skills..."

But, again, I admit that other folks probably don't feel compelled to screw around with the game quite as much as I do.

 

[Janx]

All of this substitution level and alternate class abilities seems pretty mucked up.

Why not just use Feats with carefully designed prerequisites.

Just have EVERY class get lots of feats (ex. fighter feat progression), and have all the classes features and talents listed as Feats with prerequisites mentioning level and class.

Then, the PC will have to choose at Xth level, which of a couple feats they qualify for to choose. If the feat list is big enough, one could actually hand out a lot of feats.

If one were really crazy to redesign things, they'd just invent one class (the non-class), that hands out lots of feats and skill points, and use Feats for anything that simulates an ability you have or you don't, and use Skills for anything that simulates a variable ability to do something.

Then just arrange the feats like I suggested above, and invent skills to simulate combat scores (BAB, Missile-AB, Melee-AB, etc), and the like to soak up SP (balancing with the thief's design).

 

[JoeGKushner]

In terms of number of feats, I'd like there to be some 'settings' on the rules and some knobs with indications which way to go to make a game fit different genres and styles and when future campaign sourcebooks come out, they would indiciate though their knobs/levelers, what level/style game play it's designed for.

Hit Points: <50%,50%,>50%
Feats: 1/level, 1/2 levels, 1/3 levels, 1/4 levels
Attribute Boost: 1/level, 1/2 levels, 1/4 levels,

Making the rules more modular. For example, having attacks of opportunity be an optional rule and discussion how it effects things like feat selection, CR rating on monsters (larger monsters lose a lot more attack power against melee enemies), weapon selection (why take one of those weird weapons for a 10' reach when there are no OOP?) etc...

 

[Koewn]

I have a 8th level character in my game - Rogue/Fighter/Wizard/Cleric/Human Paragon. I don't even recall the levels of each class. He's heading towards Mystic Theurge. The Comp. Mage "Armored Mage?" feature will help him out a lot.

He's very effective, but it's a good player behind the sheet.

I should also have a Monk/Rogue/DrunkenMaster, but he's built to be a diplomat. Sounds weird, but, hey. I'd love to see some Alt. Class for Rogues that can make that concept work better.

If I could find a Bard Alternate Class that drops the Music (does anyone know if that exists?), I'd have a Bard/Rogue/Druid/Fochlucan Lyricist also. (we'd alter the FochL to be without Muzak as well).

I applaud all the alternate class feature bits - from the Cloistered Cleric to the Urban Druid to whatever. It can add flavour, it can encourage multiclassing and experimentation, and it helps people figure out what *else* can be changed.

It's probably all sub-optimal, but it is a lot more fun.