The Big Book of Class Benefit Equivalencies

[Driddle]

Books such as Unearthed Arcana make several references to the idea of swapping one particular class benefit for something vaguely equivalent -- the variation of getting a girlfriend instead of a mage's familiar, for example, or swapping a barbarian's rage for the Improved Two-Needle Knitting Feat.

But has anyone actually bothered to outline the general values of the class abilities so we can standardize the modifications?

 

[Umbran]

Some folks have tried, but from what I've seen they don't seem to work out particularly well. If you break it all down, and try to call A equivalent to B, and maybe give some form of point value to each, at the end of it all, you find that you cannot exactly reconstruct the core classes.

The thing is this - class abilities don't exist in a vacuum. They exist in a context of other class abilities. That is that static interpretations of equivalency ignores synergy. The ability to use martial weapons, for example, means more to some classes than to others. If you've got few martial feats, a poor BAB, and poor hit points, losing martial weapons won't mean much. Take martial weapons away from a fighter, though, and you hamstring him.

 

[tmaaas]

...the Improved Two-Needle Knitting Feat.

This could come in handy. My wife's character sports a pair of sharpened knitting needles

(The character's an elderly rogue with the proverbial bag 'o tricks. Since her melee damage depends on Sneak Attack to be effective, you might as well go for style.)

 

[Driddle]

If you break it all down, and try to call A equivalent to B, and maybe give some form of point value to each, at the end of it all, you find that you cannot exactly reconstruct the core classes.

So let's not break down the classes entirely. I don't want to rebuild the entire machine, after all; I merely want to know which modules I can swap out.

Yeah, it would be pretty silly to say the Wizard's every-fifth-level feats could be equally substituted with five fighter feats. I'm not talking about that kind of perfect cross-class equivalency. Instead, look at each class, and each element of that class, one at a time. For example, if we changed nothing else, what would be a good variant swap for a cleric's domain(s)? Or the mage's familiar? Or a barbarian's rage? Just one element at a time for that particular class.

 

[jmucchiello]

I've already basically done this and I sell it as a PDF on RPGNow.com.

{Begin Plug}
This is what Character Customization does. The difference between it and other feature equivolency solutions is that it divvies up classes into chunks called tracks. A track is a 1-20 level progression with a few abilities attached to it. These tracks are balances with other tracks across all 20 levels. Thus instead of asking if Favored Enemy is equal to Raging. You ask, is Favored Enemy at 1st, 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th level equal to Rage 1/day at 1st, 2/day at 4th, etc, etc.

About the only real flaw with Character Customization (IMHO) is that I've been horribly delayed in releasing the 3.5 update for it. I plan to have it done by Summer. Really, I do. All the little things that changed in classes from 3.0 to 3.5 makes some of the tracks off-kilter.
{End Plug}

 

[Psion]

Some folks have tried,

"They tried and failed?"
"They tried and died."

Or something like that.

The thing is this - class abilities don't exist in a vacuum.

Well spoken.

Still, I think there is some appeal to it, but I think it should be primarily in the GM's hands, like the variant classes in the UA which would require specific greenlighting.

Sure you add a little swapability to classes, you open up the possiblities. But you also remove one of the major barriers to twinking in the game.

 

[Driddle]

Sure you add a little swapability to classes, you open up the possiblities. But you also remove one of the major barriers to twinking in the game.

A vague sense of "twinking" wouldn't be much worse than odd contortions of multiclassing to get the same thing.

 

[Umbran]

So let's not break down the classes entirely. I don't want to rebuild the entire machine, after all; I merely want to know which modules I can swap out.

The point is that even this is really campaign-dependant. Unearthed Arcana gives you some ideas, but I don't think it should be handled more "completely" than that. This is something the DM should spend time considering, not someything that should be quickly looked up in a book, and the answer taken for granted as OK.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

I think BESM d20 did this.

Although, I don't know if they managed to survive....

 

[The Sigil]

Some folks have tried, but from what I've seen they don't seem to work out particularly well. If you break it all down, and try to call A equivalent to B, and maybe give some form of point value to each, at the end of it all, you find that you cannot exactly reconstruct the core classes.

*shameless plug*

If I can ever get the writing finished, Buy The Numbers is exactly this... a "point value" for classes. Basically, you spend XP to "buy abilities" instead of levelling. Your "equivalent level" is the level that you would be at had you "levelled" with the XP (e.g., a character with 6000 XP is about the equivalent of a 4th-level character).

Yes, the system is of course subject to some twinking... which is why there will be some HEFTY disclaimers with it. And you're right... you can't reconstruct the core classes exactly... but this system recreates most class/level combinations (including multiclassing) to what I will call "10% accuracy" - that is, the amount of XP it would take to reproduce a character of class/level combination X under this system is within 10% of the XP it would take to "level" that character there. IOW, "building" the abilities of a Ftr 2/Rog 2 or a Ftr 4 or a Sor 3/Rog 1 takes 6,000 XP, give or take 10%.

Of course, you can throw everything into BAB or spells, or what have you and have a 5th or 6th level wizard's spell casting at 6,000 XP - but with 1st level wizard saves, hit points, skills, feats, BAB, etc.

It's NOT the be-all end-all system, but I REALLY like the way it can handle characters.

--The Sigil